• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

Euthanasia

Started by Zircon, July 26, 2012, 10:33:20 AM

Zircon

Did you know that routinely, the UK euthanizes 135,000 patients per year to make room for the next batch. Ain't socialized medical just great ??? Obamacare claims there will be no "death panels" to determine who gets the meds and who doesn't. Bullshit !!! Obama wants that European Model of socialism as far as medicine goes.

Medical professionals are threatening to leave the profession if this insanity goes into effect. Already pharmaceutical companies are eliminating the production of those drugs deemed "not profitable enough". In a woman's case this effects breast cancer medicines. What are they to do? Not too many options.

People like me, and I'm 63 years old, are now on social security are not "contributing" anywhere enough to society to be deemed an "asset". What do you think my fate is - and I have medical issues? Ever read a book named, "This Perfect Day" by the late Ira Levin? It is a classic (I think) - well worth the read. I suggest each of you do so.

BobGrau

Quote from: Zircon on July 26, 2012, 10:33:20 AM
Did you know that routinely, the UK euthanizes 135,000 patients per year to make room for the next batch.

Source please.

Zircon

Some person from England on the radio. Hard to believe but it wouldn't surprise me. What figures do you have since I can't provide a persons name at this time?

BobGrau

A quick google search turned up nothing related to this figure. Euthanasia is illegal in this country. Please excuse my frosty tone, but at the same time, please take note of my frosty tone.

onan

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10375877

UK health system is top on 'efficiency', says report

The UK was rated highly on quality of care and access to care
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

Could US health firm hold key to NHS reform?
Taking the global pulse of healthcare
Obama health speech: Full text
The UK's health care system is the most efficient, says a study of seven industrialised countries.

The Commonwealth Fund report looked at five areas of performance - quality, efficiency, access to care, equity and healthy lives.

The US came last in the overall rankings, which also included data from Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands and New Zealand.

But there is room for improvement in every country, says the report.

The report, which is an update to three earlier editions, includes patients and doctors' ratings of their experiences in their own health care systems.

More than 27,000 patients and primary care doctors were surveyed across all seven countries as part of the study, starting in 2007.

OVERALL HEALTH SYSTEM RANKING

1. The Netherlands

2. United Kingdom

3. Australia

4. Germany

5. New Zealand

6. Canada

7. United States

The Netherlands ranked first overall, closely followed by the UK and Australia.

The UK performed well when it came to quality of care and access to care.

In relation to access, the study says: "The UK has relatively short waiting times for basic medical care and non-emergency access to services after hours, but has longer waiting times for specialist care and elective, non-emergency surgery."

The Netherlands ranked very highly on all waiting times measurements.

When it came to efficiency, the UK and Australia ranked first and second, respectively.

Efficiency was measured by looking at total national spending on health as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), as well as the amount spent on health administration and insurance.

Costly care
In contrast, the US consistently underperformed in most areas of health care relative to other countries, says the study report.

These include access to care and quality of care whatever the background or income of the patient. This is despite the fact, the study says, that the US health system is the most costly in the world.

But, notably, the US differs from the other countries studied because it does not have a universal health insurance system.

However, the study authors believe that health reform legislation brought in in February 2009 will start to address this problem.

"The new legislation should begin to improve the affordability of health insurance and access to care when fully implemented in 2014," says the study.

Karen Davis, president of The Commonwealth Fund and one of the report's authors, cautions that there are limitations in assessing countries' performances using the perceptions and experiences of patients and doctors.

"They do not capture important dimensions of effectiveness or efficiency that might be obtained from medical records or administrative data," she said.

"Patients and physicians' assessments might be affected by their experiences and expectations, which could differ by country and culture."

BobGrau

Quote from: Zircon on July 26, 2012, 10:33:20 AM
Ain't socialized medical just great ???

It is, actually. I may be biased since my father and several of my friends would be dead without it. Particularly in the case of my dad, a private insurance company would have written him off.

onan

The search I did turned up a figure of 135000 people died from cancer in the UK. Last year almost 580000 died from cancer in the US.

Zircon

Interesting that I am unable to find it as well. The radio program is one that checks its facts before broadcasting. Apparently I'll need to check further. Until then please accept my apologies as I thought this information was vetted.

analog kid

Quote from: Zircon on July 26, 2012, 11:54:37 AM
The radio program is one that checks its facts before broadcasting.

Mmm Hmmm.

The premise for the argument would be a straw man fallacy anyway.

onan

Quote from: Zircon on July 26, 2012, 11:54:37 AM
Until then please accept my apologies as I thought this information was vetted.

When you start getting paid to report, I will expect apologies. Until then, carry on sir.

BobGrau

Quote from: Zircon on July 26, 2012, 11:54:37 AM
Interesting that I am unable to find it as well. The radio program is one that checks its facts before broadcasting. Apparently I'll need to check further. Until then please accept my apologies as I thought this information was vetted.

What Onan said.

There are a lot of British critics of the National Health Service, and they're right about a lot of it. Overcrowding, neglect, doctors going days without sleep... Pretty much like any hospital anywhere in the world.
The cynic in me thinks it's entirely possible that there could be an unspoken policy of allowing people to die for financial reasons - again like any hospital in an country - but it is very wrong to say it's a matter of routine policy.

Quote from: onan on July 26, 2012, 11:11:00 AM
... OVERALL HEALTH SYSTEM RANKING...



I see various overall rankings in the media quite a bit - health, education, longetivity, crime, and the US seems to come out much lower than I would expect or we would wish. I wonder what the rankings would be if the portion of the data relating to the massive ghettos in our major, and sometimes smaller cites were to be excluded. Where we would 'rank' if we compared apples to apples with these other western or even non-western countries.

This is not to suggest the people trapped in these inner city 'war zone' hell holes should not get health care, education, decent food, etc, but too many don't take care of themselves or their children as well as they should or could for a variety of reasons (there certainly seem to be plenty of programs and services for those that need them to use if they choose to). With the higher rate of drug and alcohol addiction and much higher violent crime rate in these communities, where learning is 'acting white' and going to a job is being an 'Uncle Tom', is it a surprise when these same people end up with more health issues?

I could be way off base here, it's just something I wonder about when I see these stats and rankings. Especially when the rankings themselves are published perhaps to persuade us that the more Socialist approach of the other democracies would be better for us.

onan

Quote from: Paper*Boy on July 26, 2012, 12:34:15 PM
Especially when the rankings themselves are published perhaps to persuade us that the more Socialist approach of the other democracies would be better for us.

Or they could just be facts.


http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Publications/Fund-Reports/2007/May/Mirror--Mirror-on-the-Wall--An-International-Update-on-the-Comparative-Performance-of-American-Healt.aspx


Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: An International Update on the Comparative Performance of American Health Care


Overview
Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions of performance, relative to other countries. This reportâ€"an update to two earlier editionsâ€"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 nationsâ€"Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdomâ€"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.

Executive Summary
The U.S. health system is the most expensive in the world, but comparative analyses consistently show the United States underperforms relative to other countries on most dimensions of performance. This report, which includes information from primary care physicians about their medical practices and views of their countries' health systems, confirms the patient survey findings discussed in previous editions of Mirror, Mirror. It also includes information on health care outcomes that were featured in the U.S. health system scorecard issued by the Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System.


Among the six nations studiedâ€"Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United Statesâ€"the U.S. ranks last, as it did in the 2006 and 2004 editions of Mirror, Mirror. Most troubling, the U.S. fails to achieve better health outcomes than the other countries, and as shown in the earlier editions, the U.S. is last on dimensions of access, patient safety, efficiency, and equity. The 2007 edition includes data from the six countries and incorporates patients' and physicians' survey results on care experiences and ratings on various dimensions of care.

The most notable way the U.S. differs from other countries is the absence of universal health insurance coverage. Other nations ensure the accessibility of care through universal health insurance systems and through better ties between patients and the physician practices that serve as their long-term "medical home." It is not surprising, therefore, that the U.S. substantially underperforms other countries on measures of access to care and equity in health care between populations with above-average and below average incomes.



WOTR

Quote from: Paper*Boy on July 26, 2012, 12:42:17 PM
This is not to suggest the people trapped in these inner city 'war zone' hell holes should not get health care, education, decent food, etc, but too many don't take care of themselves or their children as well as they should or could for a variety of reasons (there certainly seem to be plenty of programs and services for those that need them to use if they choose to). With the higher rate of drug and alcohol addiction and much higher violent crime rate in these communities, where learning is 'acting white' and going to a job is being an 'Uncle Tom', is it a surprise when these same people end up with more health issues?
We have our fair share of problems as well and populations who do not fare as well as the rest of society.  While there are not the ghettos that exist south of the boarder on the same scale, they do exist.  Look at the level of unemployment, poverty, alcoholism, drug abuse and the low life expectancy of those on reserves.  There are areas in major cities that are severely economically depressed for various reasons.

I know that I have a bias for universal health care though I do acknowledge there are some major problems.  Having said that, access to health care can easily make the difference between having a chance and not.  I was in LA last year on the transit looking at an older, homeless gentleman in obvious pain from his hands.  I got a look at them and you could tell they had been severely frozen several times in the past and there were some major problems.  It was then that I realized that while he might be homeless in Canada he would likely still have a chance.  The times they were frozen he could have got medical treatment and he could still work odd jobs or as a day labourer (if he chose to.)  As things stood, he was trapped.  Without the ability to see a doctor and get treatment he would never be able to use his hands again.  At best he could hope to add himself to the lists for social housing and join those in the ghettos you mentioned.

Between the health care denials from insurance companies, the HMO stories you hear and the bleak future for those without insurance I have never had any wish to trade systems.  When the homeless man in Florida had his face half eaten I remember making the comment that things just went from bad to worse.  Yes, the hospital will save his life... but they will present a homeless man with a bill he can never pay.  They will save his life, but the plastic surgery that will be considered cosmetic (he will live without it) would not be performed, the care needed (psychologically and physically) will not be there in the following years.  Possibly with the national attention it garnered the outcome will be different, but he would probably have stood a better chance under a different health care system.

Finally, I recently read a book on Columbine (I do not recall the title off hand.)  One of the things it mentioned and brought up were the medical bills faced by many of the victims.  It was unreal to me that after loosing children and the toll that took parents would be presented with bills that were not able to be paid.

I know that distortions exist.  Our government tells us that we have the best system in the world (we do not.)  However, I would not trade systems unless I was positive that I had the money to pay for good health care insurance down there for the rest of my life.  I follow economics a little and seeing the number of medical bankruptcies always blows my mind.  People do, of course, go bankrupt up here from health issues (while we may not have a doctors bill, not working while you have cancer will financially kill you if you do not have disability insurance.).  However, we are not presented with the bill for chemo and surgery at the end of the day.  I honestly believe it makes a difference to society in general.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod