http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...hological.html
The difference is an equivalent specialist in the US would cost half or third as much as a British one because the American doctor has a wider client base.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...hological.html
The difference is an equivalent specialist in the US would cost half or third as much as a British one because the American doctor has a wider client base.
Hope is the denial of reality
The difference is an equivalent specialist in the US would cost half or third as much as a British one because the American doctor has a wider client base.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Does attacking strawmen make you feel better about yourself? How is that chart in any way relevant to British private doctors being prohibitively expensive? I could never understand the hyper-nationalism that ekes out of most Brits whenever someone criticizes the NHS. The only time I've seen similar venom was when I criticized intelligent design in front of a Mormon.
Hope is the denial of reality
Seems to me you're the hyper-nationalist posing strawmen arguments. The US system is NOT superior by any measure. Just because we have more "private specialists" doesn't mean patients get the care they actually need, and can afford.Originally Posted by Loki
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18523896
And this is evidence of how much NHS doctors care about their patients.
Hope is the denial of reality
It's actually not.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Might want to go and look up how much British doctors get paid and what they get in benefits. But hey, if you don't like what the government is giving you, the clear solution is to screw your patients. All those patients waiting months for their appointments will be very happy to hear that they can start the wait again!
Hope is the denial of reality
If you could reply to your own posts it might look like this: clearly, you hate physicians, their earnings and benefits, and you blame the government for doctors screwing their own patients.
British doctors support having a state-run healthcare system. If they don't want their benefits set by the governments, they shouldn't be supporting this system.
Hope is the denial of reality
1. First time in 40 years. That's how much they care.
2. One day, for which they've prepared thoroughly.
3. Continuing to see any patient that needs urgent attention.
4. The information in the article itself does not show "how much they care". At best it can be said to suggest a relative measure of "how much they care".
5. Do you even know what the particulars of the dispute are?
Now I'm not saying I think they're doing the right thing; I tend to think doctors are well paid and that their problems usually cannot be solved by higher wages, and so I'm okay with doctors being forced to take a harder hit than other well-paying professions even if it's unfair in one sense. But if you're going to talk about how much doctors in the NHS care or do not care then you should probably take a good look at your own home first. How's that whole systematically-denying-healthcare-to-the-uninsured-or-poor-thing going? The whole business of dropping patients who don't come with high enough profit margins? How long has it been now, several decades? I forget, how well are American doctors paid?
You've been generous in sharing articles with us, so I thought I'd return the favour. To be fair the articles you share in these discussions usually suck and you've yet to address any of the substantial responses you've gotten over the years from eg. Steely, or from me for that matter. But let me start you off with this:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1101882
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7510121.stm The same cancer that claims 1/10 of Americans claims 1/2 of Brits who get it.
Hope is the denial of reality
That's like saying all US physicians support our employer-subsidized, private for-profit insurance industry dominated healthcare system, and don't give a shit about their patients.
Your brain-leak seems to have led you to forget the responses to that study, but let's let that lie for a while. Explain how that article shows that American doctors care more than British doctors. Oh yeah, did you actually read the NEJM article? Wait, did you even read your own BBC article?http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7510121.stm The same cancer that claims 1/10 of Americans claims 1/2 of Brits who get it.
For example: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/bowel/The UK fared pretty poorly, trailing most of its western European neighbours - although the data is from the 1990s since when survival rates have risen.
[...]
"Since that time, cancer survival rates in England have been steadily improving for but we accept that there is further work to do to reduce the gap between us and the rest of northern and western Europe and America."
[...]
The UK was spending just over 7% but that figure has now been increased following record rises in the NHS budget to bring it much closer to the likes of France and Germany.
Which is nice because, unlike breast cancer and prostate cancer, lead time bias is not a major problem in evaluating interventions for colon cancer.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Did you read your own link?http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7510121.stm The same cancer that claims 1/10 of Americans claims 1/2 of Brits who get it.
There's a lot of data to unpack regarding cancer survival rates. Firstly, with a cancer diagnosis...which can either come via routine screening or as a diagnostic procedure. Prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment has changed drastically in just the last five years. High PSAs in men with enlarged prostates over age 70 no longer means surgical intervention, chemotherapy or radiation....even if it's cancerous. The chemo and radiation was killing them faster than ageing with prostate cancer, untreated.The importance of money was further illustrated by an ethnic breakdown of outcomes in the US.
White Americans, who are on the whole wealthier and therefore more able to afford the insurance which underpins the US system, were up to 14% more likely than others to survive cancer.
Certain stats can skew one way or another, until it's refined. And all health systems are in the process of defining/refining. Breast cancer screening (mammograms) used to be recommended for every female "of reproductive age", or anyone taking birth control hormones, until certain genes and risks were identified. Even though that technically limited the number of women needing mammograms, that didn't mean de-funding publicly funded mammograms was a good idea.
The difference is I can't find a single poll showing British doctors are against a government-run system.
It also looks like the NHS is full of Minx clones: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...-smokers-obese
Whose fault is it that Britain was underfunding cancer treatment?
Hope is the denial of reality
1.
2. Given that I support giving healthcare to people even though they smoke and are fat--unlike you "personal responsibility" typesDoctors.net.uk, a professional networking site, found that 593 (54%) of the 1,096 doctors who took part in the self-selecting survey--I have to wonder if it might not be time for you to stop smoking whatever new crack it is you've scored.
... with any healthcare systemWhose fault is it that Britain was underfunding cancer treatment?what kind of a fantasy world do you live in? But here's the cool thing: in a government-run healthcare system you can actually implement system-wide changes. Unless you want black people to die that is.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Having read your article I now realise you probably didn't even read it yourself, as per usualI see your practice of tossing out nonsense articles and seeing what sticks is still a thing
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
This from the guy who posts every one off NHS horror story or individual bad statistic he can find, as if to say "see, universal health care really does suck". Like there aren't enough bad statistics and horror stories from the US system to make a weekly TV program out of.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
This is a very strange objection btw and I wonder if you've thought it through. How many Americans would you say oppose the concept of the USA? How many Americans would you say oppose the concept of democracy and democratic government? Would you say that almost all Americans should therefore accept everything the US does, accept every single consequence of their democracy, without ever being allowed to protest or to resist? Are you in fact saying that if they don't like it they can pack up and leave?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Everyone knows that changes imposed from above work great, and fixing fundamental problems in any sector of the economy is as simple as the government finding the proper solution.
Hope is the denial of reality
I don't need statistics. I know that I have never had to wait for medical treatment in the US, nor has anyone I've known. I know that doctors never had problems using the most advanced medical technology on me or others I know, and have done so within hours or days of me/my friends/my relatives needing those tests. I also know of at least a dozen examples of NHS massive waiting lists/shitty diagnosis/rude doctors/quacks/and incompetence from a handful of Brits I know well. And I've gone to the doctors with them in several instances, and have witnessed these problems first-hand. The only problem I've seen in the US is the high cost of treatment for the non-insured. But in Britain, the problem is getting the treatment to start with, with numerous treatments either having massive waiting lists or not being covered by the NHS. If the people in question were desperate for treatment, they ended up spending thousands of pounds on private treatment that I also know costs a fraction of that in the US.
Hope is the denial of reality
Why would you give such credence to "polls" when they're predominantly commissioned by consumer groups?
Yeah, and whose "fault" is it when some illnesses are underfunded, because the private sector can't spend an infinite amount of money on R & D?Whose fault is it that Britain was underfunding cancer treatment?
You really do need statistics, because waiting times are a problem in the US as well, difference being that they are more likely to affect people who actually need urgent care. I suggest you look up this information not so that you can admit defeat but so that you can get a better picture of the system you so strongly endorse. By the reasoning in your post the no-one in the US has any problems with diseases or obstacles that you yourself haven't encountered, which is almost like a caricature of a GGT post.
As for your characterisation of the US vs the UK wrt access to care, do you imagine that high costs of treatment don't block access to care in the US? Are you truly that naive? US patients forego important checkups and medication because of high treatment costs. US patients suffer due to limited access when they're sick and need swift care, even though they in their desperation may turn to ED:s. How can you not know that?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
So what you're saying is in fact that Americans who don't like what the US or its government does should just gtfo because if they support government and democracy in principle they must accept every consequence of those things without objection? I'd be happy with a simple "yes" or "no". I realise that the answer must be "yes" based on the objection you've made but I want to give you the opportunity to admit that you didn't think though the implications of your objection.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Quoted for prosperity. Loki don't need no stinking stats. Loki anecdotal experiences, or those of anyone he knows, is good enough to compare national systems: no problem in the US (other than high costs that bankrupt people, regardless of outcome). But in the UK there's a triage waiting list, and non-essential treatments might be delayed. OMFG.
Bullshit. 84% of Americans are covered by insurance, and the co-pays for doctor visits are minuscule. From the other 16%, many are college-age and don't really need the insurance. Sure, you get part of that 16% who fall through the cracks, but that's compared to 99% of Brits who are forced to make use of the NHS (the other 1% is rich enough to afford private treatment).As for your characterisation of the US vs the UK wrt access to care, do you imagine that high costs of treatment don't block access to care in the US? Are you truly that naive? US patients forego important checkups and medication because of high treatment costs. US patients suffer due to limited access when they're sick and need swift care, even though they in their desperation may turn to ED:s. How can you not know that?
Hope is the denial of reality
I'd like to see you talk about "minor delays" for non-essential treatments when your son gets sectioned for mental illness because he hasn't been able to see a psychiatrist for a year. Your repeated assaults on people with serious but non-life threatening conditions is monstrous, which is how I now view you as a human being. Ignored from now on.
Hope is the denial of reality
1. Insurance coverage does not mean care
2. copays for doctor visits aren't the main consumer barrier
3. College aged people still experience disease, injuries, and accidents, whether or not they have insurance coverage
The US still has ~40 million people without any health coverage. That's pathetic, considering the numbers who qualify for Medicare or Medicaid.
My repeated assaults on people....is monstrous? WTF? In case you've forgotten, I've been battling with "mental illness" and its treatment for about a decade. For myself and one of my children. Don't you DARE try that moral tactic. Feel free to put me on Ignore, though. Asshole.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote