Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
If that's the case, then why did you compare the costs in the US to the costs in Britain? You directly contrast the costs in the US and then UK, but then go on to state the Norway and Finland have similar survival rates as the US "while spending far less", but fail to produce any numbers or statistics to back up any of your claims. In fact, you specifically avoided providing numbers on survival rates and costs for Norway and Finland, but made the adamant claim that:
"You can look at Norway, Finland, and other similar countries and find that they have comparable cancer survival rates to the US while spending FAR less."
Sounds like you're talking out of your posterior again, especially considering brandonbull provided facts to back up his claims, while you provide...more empty rhetoric.
You barely merit a response, but here you go: Link 1
Cancer outcomes.
Average cancer survival rate for the US: 64.6%
Average cancer survival rate for Finland: 58.5%
Average cancer survival rate for Sweden: 61%.
Link 2:
Per capita health spending.
Per capita spending on health care for the US: $4271
Per capita spending on health care for Finland: $1704
Per capita spending on health care for Sweden: $2145.
When you put these numbers together we find that we spend 250% of what Finland does, and we get a 6% increase in survival rates. We spend 200% of what Sweden does and we get a 3.5% increase in survival rates.
This post was more than you deserve.
