It Works Soooo Well in Britain

[essence]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Where can a person learn the real facts about the NHS? If it is true that the doctors, rather than bureaucrats make the medical decisions, that would satisfy one of my criteria for supporting a single payer system in the US. (The other is a constitutional amendment providing for the system.) I'd like to learn more how it works in practice.

I am not in the medical profession, and know very little about it, but it may be useful for you to look up NICE.

http://www.nice.org.uk/

As far as I can see, it is government funded (through the department of health) and the government may have a say in what areas they investigate, but otherwise they work at arms length from the government.


You will always get porr journalism such as http://larouchepac.com/node/10431, and you will always get people who think there is a never ending bucket of money to pay for every treatment for everybody, but most of us grew out of that.

Of course, there is private medicine which runs alongside the NHS for those who want it, often employees will belong to a group medical insurance scheme, but the main thing that provides is faster access to minor treatments and more check ups. If I have serious cancer I would go to the NHS, if I break a toe I would go private. I went to my NHS doctor once and asked about a check up, I feared a finger up my bum to check for prostate problems, he said he wouldn't do it, it is a waste of time, too many false positives. I think in the US there is maybe a different approach, and maybe too many unnecessary (or even harmful) treatments for those who can afford it?

I must look up 'finger up bum' on NICE web site.

[mastermind238]

Essence, I'll condense my responses to some of your many posts into one.

First of all, I'm not really retracting anything. I just offered, for the sake of argument, that EVEN IF the actual number were far lower than the 130,000 claimed, it would still be an evil system that delivered those numbers. And even if the current healthcare delivery system failed equal numbers in this country, it wouldn't be because of state mandated rationing of care.

You seem to draw a bright-line distinction between doctors and the state, thereby relieving the state of any blame. Come on ... NHS doctors are employees of the state, and it's the state that sets broad policy objectives and controls the budget. If doctors here withheld care from patients using the same guidelines given to HNS doctors, in most states they would be prosecuted and jailed.

Obamacare has yet to be implemented, so who's to say that when it's in full flower it won't look a lot like NHS? The program won't really begin to take shape until after the '12 elections - by design. That's why I offered the clip of Berwick extolling the virtues of NHS. Though he's now gone, it guys like him that will oversee the implementation of Obamacare. Do you not remember that Rahm Emanuels's brother, the "noted bioethicist" Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, was tapped early on to advise OMB on how a healthcare overhaul should be designed? This is the Dr. Emanuel who believes that babies and the elderly are INHERENTLY less deserving of healthcare than teens and the middle-aged (as long as they have a high enough IQ to make their potential contribution to society a net plus). And do you not remember that Obama was the only - THE ONLY - Illinois state senator to vote against a law to require physicians to give medical treatment to babies born after botched abortions? To anyone willing to pay attention, it's not hard to discern that Obama's view of a radically different healthcare delivery system for the US looks a lot like NHS.

[essence]

Originally Posted by mastermind238

EVEN IF the actual number were far lower than the 130,000 claimed, it would still be an evil system that delivered those numbers. And even if the current healthcare delivery system failed equal numbers in this country, it wouldn't be because of state mandated rationing of care.

Thanks for your considered response. As I say, I am not qualified to discuss this matter properly. But from your quote....

- there is no question it is far lower than 130,000, that was simply scare mongering. There may be some reliable statistics on this, but I wouldn't even know where to look. Not the Daily Mail.

- if the proportionate numbers of deaths in the US are similar, if it is not due to state mandated rationing of care, then whose fault is it? Who is the evil party in your view, if not the state? The insurance companies? The individuals or families? The health professionals? Don't tell me old people don't die unnecessarily in the US. I know one myself who is getting inadequate care for heart problems, and another who cannot get the best medicine for aids.

- are you saying a single mistaken death means it is an evil system? I think a reality check is needed, mistakes happen all the time. It would be evil if it was intentional. I don;t consider, when my mother was dying, that an extra dose of pain killer was evil, even if it may have hastened death by a day or two. Similarly, a baby born who is not going to survive more than a few hours has to be handled compassionately but realistically. (I'm not talking about premature, my daughter was born 2 month early and due to great NHS service she is now a very strapping young woman).

- as I say, NHS is far from perfect, it needs constant renewal. It also works alongside a private system for those who want it. I hope I don't spend my last days in an NHS home, and have enough to care for my own old age.

[mastermind238]

My comments in red, obviously.

I REALLY would encourage you to dig a little deeper into the background of the people Obama has chosen to design and implement Obamacare. I already mentioned two - Donald Berwick and Ezekiel Emanuel. What these people believe and profess publicly is chilling.

Originally Posted by essence

Thanks for your considered response. As I say, I am not qualified to discuss this matter properly. But from your quote....

- There may be some reliable statistics on this, but I wouldn't even know where to look. Not the Daily Mail. If you wouldn't know where to look, then why NOT the Daily Mail?

- if the proportionate numbers of deaths in the US are similar, if it is not due to state mandated rationing of care, then whose fault is it? Where in the USA is there state-mandated rationing of healthcare? Tell me. Who is the evil party in your view, if not the state? NOT the state, which was my only point. The insurance companies? The individuals or families? The health professionals? Don't tell me old people don't die unnecessarily in the US. Of course old people die unnecessarily in the USA. So do young people and everyone in between. But it's NOT because the state has forced a provider to withhold care. I know one myself who is getting inadequate care for heart problems, and another who cannot get the best medicine for aids. My condolences.

- are you saying a single mistaken death means it is an evil system? No, a death caused or hastened by STATE policy that deliberately withholds treatment means an evil system. I think a reality check is needed, mistakes happen all the time. Yes, they do. We're not talking about mistakes. We're talking about deliberate withholding of treatment by government policy. It would be evil if it was intentional. I don;t consider, when my mother was dying, that an extra dose of pain killer was evil, even if it may have hastened death by a day or two. Similarly, a baby born who is not going to survive more than a few hours has to be handled compassionately but realistically. (I'm not talking about premature, my daughter was born 2 month early and due to great NHS service she is now a very strapping young woman).

- as I say, NHS is far from perfect, it needs constant renewal. It also works alongside a private system for those who want it. I hope I don't spend my last days in an NHS home, and have enough to care for my own old age.

[essence]

I may have not posed my question very clearly.

You can;t blame state controlled rationing in the UK, and not acknowledge that other forces cause unnecessary deaths in the US. I ask again, what is the cause in the US? Maybe poverty? So what do you suggest is done about that?

Whatever the cause in the US, what are you going to do about it? You can't just criticise another system and accept the US system as perfect.

OK, the Daily Mail is unbelievable (unfortunately like most newspapers nowadays), but the professor quoted has some background, and is a catholic so likely to take a strong view on anything to do with euthenasia.

Here is a link to one of his earlier reports, which has some statistics which I have not yet read. He has worked in the US and UK.

http://catholiceducation.org/article...ia/eu0010.html

One of the references is

Asch DA. The role of critical care nurses in euthanasia and assisted suicide. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1374-1379. (Survey of 1600 critical care nurses: 16% have performed euthanasia and 4% have hastened death by pretending to provide treatment ordered by a physician)

but it doesn;t say which country - I kind of assume it is US, as it is New England Journal of Medicine, but I may be wrong.

So 16% of old people in New England are murdered by nurses! (can I be a daily Mail journalist now please?).

Let me check it up.

It was US.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8614424

also for a comparison between countries

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...v030p00494.pdf

[mastermind238]

Originally Posted by essence

Whatever the cause in the US, what are you going to do about it? You can't just criticise another system and accept the US system as perfect.

Sorry, but your premise is wrong so those aren't my only choices.

First, I don't accept that the US system as perfect. Never said I did.

Second, I most certainly CAN criticize an evil system. Whether or not I think the US system is perfect - and I don't - I will criticize evil wherever I see it. And I don't have to devise an alternative system to replace it in order to point out that it's evil.

The US system can be fixed by measures far less drastic than Obamacare, and in a way that is consistent with Constitutional principles. There are plenty of good ideas out there based on free market principles.

Sometime when I have more time, I can elaborate on some of the more obvious successes brought about by competition and those free-market principles - Lasik eye surgery and Ultrafast CT scans. They shared two features when first introduced - they were very expensive, and almost no insurance policy in the US would cover them. The result? They are now both amazingly affordable now. And why? Competition.

When third parties (insurance companies or governments) aren't involved in the transaction, people tend to be more careful with their own money. Whether it's an insurance company or the state picking up the tab, third parties always drive up the cost of goods and services. Examples abound outside of medicine as well. College tuition. Why is it so high? Because colleges know that no matter how fast they increase tuition, the government will be there to raise grants and loans to keep up. If there was no third party there doling out OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY (mine, to be specific), college tuition wouldn't be so astronomical now.

I could go on, but do I need to?

[essence]

So, you have an obsessive disorder with regards to 'the fucking constitution' and you don't acknowledge that nurses in US murder old people every day in much larger numbers than the UK.

What is your evidence that government drives up prices in NHS? OK, I see, it is simply your simplistic prejudices extrapolated onto systems of which you have no experience.

Good work, batman.

Four legs good, two legs bad.

Capitalism good, government bad.

It's desparate.

No comments on whether the Dr Patrick is a good witness or not? Total neglect of the evidence-based information I provided you with?

[CuteOldGuy]

Well, Essence. The US Constitution is the law of the land here. In theory, any law that contradicts the Constitution is null and void. So yes, true American patriots have an obsession with the Constitution, because it is the basis of our liberty. Unfortunately, the authority of the Constitution has eroded over the years, and very little remains. We are trying to get it back.

And the statement "Capitalism good, government bad" is exactly right. Government needs to be limited as much as possible. That is why we have a Constitution. And there is no better means ever devised for the distribution of scarce resources than capitalism. Unfortunately, we do not practice capitalism in the US anymore. We have a crony-capitalist system, which is an unholy alliance of government and business. It will develop into full blown fascism if we don't stop it soon.

But ideally, yes. Constitution good, tyranny bad. Capitalism good, government bad.

[essence]

Like I say, you have an obsession problem, you use the constitution to prevent any rational thought.

It's like catholics (or any other religion) saying 'as a catholic I believe in bla bla bla'.

Complete BS. If it's good, argue on its merits, not because it fits your constitution religion.

I've nothing against your constitution, but don't treat it like the holy bible.

Now, back to sane people...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...g-attacks.html

Don;t you realise all this NHS bashing is just a lame excuse for republicans to show what liars they are?

All they can talk about is 'whisper whisper I've got this really great plan for medical care, but don't tell anybody, I haven't put it in writing yet, but don't take your shares out of the insurance companies yet'.

What is evil is those who prefer making money out of state-supported corrupt capitalism rather than providing good health to ALL your citizens.

I run my own business, so have nothing against capitalism, but don't tell me all capitalism is pure and free from government decisions. What crap.

[CuteOldGuy]

Well, just remember our Constitution when it is time for our fighting force to come save your sorry European asses again. You just can't resist attacking America, can you? Shove a lime up your ass and go home.

[essence]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Well, just remember our Constitution when it is time for our fighting force to come save your sorry European asses again. You just can't resist attacking America, can you? Shove a lime up your ass and go home.

This is a wonderful example of unintelligence. this is a thread attacking UK's NHS, I dare to try to defend it, and then y'all are so fucking sensitive that you accuse me (moi!) of attacking the US.

I am home, it is lovely, raining and 18 degrees C (that is celcius for all you retards).

I have my travel insurance so i am covered if I get sick when in the US. It costs almost nothing.

I love limes, I love margheritas, but I'm not so sure about one up my ass.

I have never attacked America, I just attack the stupid fag ends.

[gnadfly]

I work for one of the biggest companies on the planet that has major interest on every continent.

Our European colleagues have supplemental insurance. To paraphrase them: The regular state health care system is great if you need a broken arm set. But you're in trouble if you have cancer.

The US has euthanasia its called hospice care. Its just drawn out a little.

[CuteOldGuy]

I must apologize, Essence. I was a little testy earlier. I know you're a European, and as such it is simply your nature to feel superior and arrogant. And it's normal for your ilk to run down America, as it makes you feel even more important. Still, when trouble arises, you call on this little backward country to save you. We know that. No problem.

What I am trying to do is keep the US free and strong, because if we become like you, we will be as weak and arrogant as you. Then when you let some tyrant arise in your midst, determined to take over the continent, we won't be able to save your ass, because we will be weak and helpless, like you.

I'm really just trying to help you, and make sure the US is there when you need us. As no doubt, you will again, soon.

So, I'm sorry for getting testy. I just had a bad day. We're all good.

[gnadfly]

FYI COG about Americans being "sensitive."

The Europeans frequently call their Houston IT staff "arrogant cowboys." Seriously, to our face. But don't call them "Eurotrash" or ask legitimate questions that may imply their lack of knowledge. The masters will sic HR on you. Nobody is more sensitive than the "blue blood" Europeans...and I deal daily with people from Europe, Brazil, Malaysia, India and the Philippines.

[CuteOldGuy]

Thanks, Gnad. That's why I apologized to Essence. Didn't want to hurt his feelings.