Stephen Hawking: "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS"

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: JKing106
*Listens as the Neocon fanboys google furiously for some anecdote to refute facts.*

WTF...is there an echo in here?

 

[zeruty]

Originally posted by: JKing106
*Listens as the Neocon fanboys google furiously for some anecdote to refute facts.*

How about this little factoid?

Stephen Hawking didn't start developing ALS until he already had a B.A.

Within a few years, he had a Ph.D


A college graduate is "worth more" to society than a non-college grad.

Once he began to excel and take a forefront in modern science theory, he became pretty much one of those MOST VALUABLE people on the entire planet.

Of course he receives the best treatment possible. I'm sure he never has to deal with long wait times for care, etc.

Now, find a garbage truck driver or janitor that developed ALS and received as excellent of treatment, then I will be more willing to accept the argument

 

[imported_inspire]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
PHOKUS LIVES! I was beginning to worry...

I'm busy buying a house

But don't worry, i'll still devote what little time i have to debunking rightwing bullshit.

Gratz on the house!

Welcome back...your balanced perspective and nonpartisan objectivity have been sorely missed.

pfft, being nonpartisan and balanced is overrated, as long as I continue to have science and facts on my side, i'm good to go

It may be overrated, but it's quickly becoming the only path to any real progress.

 

[Athena]

Originally posted by: EXman
Go Look up Canada's own #'s on how many CT scanners ond MRI machines they have per person in Canada compared to the US. Then compair wait times. Use the governments numbers.

Are you implying that numbers of machines equates to quality of care? If so, that would contradict most of the available research. As Atul Gwande found in McAllen, Texas increased numbers of imaging machines don't lead to better health outcomes -- although they do seem to seem to improve doctor revenues.

That's why Medicare has proposed changes in MRI payments and would like to thwart self-referrals.

The numbers are shocking.

Which numbers; the Canadian or US? Are you shocked by the fact the Canadians seem to do so well with fewer machines or by the amount of overuse of imaging services in the US by physicians who, having invested in imaging systems, may be overusing them?

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Hawking clearly has received great service from the NHS. People in similar conditions here in the US get great treatment as well. What's the point of this thread?

Lets see, I iwll try and help ya out.

Someone says the NHS would say SH is worthless. SH comes back and says actually i would not be here today if nto for them.


And yea plenty of people get treatment like SH in the US, if they have VERY good insurmace and/or lots of money.

 

[misle]

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: EXman
Go Look up Canada's own #'s on how many CT scanners ond MRI machines they have per person in Canada compared to the US. Then compair wait times. Use the governments numbers.

Are you implying that numbers of machines equates to quality of care? If so, that would contradict most of the available research. As Atul Gwande found in McAllen, Texas increased numbers of imaging machines don't lead to better health outcomes -- although they do seem to seem to improve doctor revenues.

That's why Medicare has proposed changes in MRI payments and would like to thwart self-referrals.

The numbers are shocking.

Which numbers; the Canadian or US? Are you shocked by the fact the Canadians seem to do so well with fewer machines or by the amount of overuse of imaging services in the US by physicians who, having invested in imaging systems, may be overusing them?

I think he's talking about wait times. Supposedly, in Canada, there's always a wait for CT's & MRI's. The quicker the diagnosis, the better the care.

 

[rudder]

Maybe if this guy had been a noted scholar he would get better treatment.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: misle

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: EXman
Go Look up Canada's own #'s on how many CT scanners ond MRI machines they have per person in Canada compared to the US. Then compair wait times. Use the governments numbers.

Are you implying that numbers of machines equates to quality of care? If so, that would contradict most of the available research. As Atul Gwande found in McAllen, Texas increased numbers of imaging machines don't lead to better health outcomes -- although they do seem to seem to improve doctor revenues.

That's why Medicare has proposed changes in MRI payments and would like to thwart self-referrals.

The numbers are shocking.

Which numbers; the Canadian or US? Are you shocked by the fact the Canadians seem to do so well with fewer machines or by the amount of overuse of imaging services in the US by physicians who, having invested in imaging systems, may be overusing them?

I think he's talking about wait times. Supposedly, in Canada, there's always a wait for CT's & MRI's. The quicker the diagnosis, the better the care.

Those are not the only forms of Diagnoses.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: rudder
Maybe if this guy had been a noted scholar he would get better treatment.

And from that same story you have:
A spokesman for NHS East Riding of Yorkshire said Mr Boynton's case gave an 'inaccurate scare-mongering picture of dental service provision in East Yorkshire based solely on the claims of one man' The spokesman said: 'As well as 34 dental practices, we have seven dental access centres across East Riding of Yorkshire, including Beverley, where Mr Boynton could access a full range of NHS dentist services.


You need both sides for the full story.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Everyone always attacks those who are against the current UHC proposal. Obviously if you aren't with the program you are a right wing nutjob. Here is all I want from the supporters. It never gets answered but I will ask again and continue to ask. I figure once a specific answer is given then that means we truly have all the details.

How much will my taxes (fed and/or state) increase if the current bill passes? What is the benefit I gain through this tax increase?

Perhaps if these two simple questions (simple assuming the bill is specific) are answered I can then make an informed decision. Until that time I'm still against the current proposal.

Note: I refer only to the current proposal and not to reform in general.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: rudder
Maybe if this guy had been a noted scholar he would get better treatment.

And from that same story you have:
A spokesman for NHS East Riding of Yorkshire said Mr Boynton's case gave an 'inaccurate scare-mongering picture of dental service provision in East Yorkshire based solely on the claims of one man' The spokesman said: 'As well as 34 dental practices, we have seven dental access centres across East Riding of Yorkshire, including Beverley, where Mr Boynton could access a full range of NHS dentist services.


You need both sides for the full story.

I would like both sides of Stephen Hawkings story. Is he not an asset to Great Britain and would that factor in the amount/quality of care he has received? Maybe someone who lives across the pond can answer that.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: misle

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: EXman
Go Look up Canada's own #'s on how many CT scanners ond MRI machines they have per person in Canada compared to the US. Then compair wait times. Use the governments numbers.

Are you implying that numbers of machines equates to quality of care? If so, that would contradict most of the available research. As Atul Gwande found in McAllen, Texas increased numbers of imaging machines don't lead to better health outcomes -- although they do seem to seem to improve doctor revenues.

That's why Medicare has proposed changes in MRI payments and would like to thwart self-referrals.

The numbers are shocking.

Which numbers; the Canadian or US? Are you shocked by the fact the Canadians seem to do so well with fewer machines or by the amount of overuse of imaging services in the US by physicians who, having invested in imaging systems, may be overusing them?

I think he's talking about wait times. Supposedly, in Canada, there's always a wait for CT's & MRI's. The quicker the diagnosis, the better the care.

Those are not the only forms of Diagnoses.

Thinking about this and just realized that I'd probably be dead right now if I were in a health care system where there were long waits for MRIs. I had a problem several years ago that was imminently life threatening...my doctor did not realize it until he saw my MRI results...I was given immediate emergency surgery. A 2-week wait would have most likely killed me and I would just be reduced to an anomoly?a statistical wart on the ass of radical health care reform. Just anecdotal crap to some I imagine.

 

[Analogsoul]

Ugggh, I'm sick and tired of right-wing fear mongering regarding the NHS. It's not a perfect system, there isn't such a thing, however it does work in providing health care for every British citizen. To anyone who thinks that the American system is without flaws is seriously deluded. Despite not being perfect, the NHS flaws pale in comparison with the American system. Please read this editorial of an American citizen's exerience with NHS.

Text

 

[soulcougher73]

Originally posted by: zeruty

Originally posted by: JKing106
*Listens as the Neocon fanboys google furiously for some anecdote to refute facts.*

How about this little factoid?

Stephen Hawking didn't start developing ALS until he already had a B.A.

Within a few years, he had a Ph.D


A college graduate is "worth more" to society than a non-college grad.

Once he began to excel and take a forefront in modern science theory, he became pretty much one of those MOST VALUABLE people on the entire planet.

Of course he receives the best treatment possible. I'm sure he never has to deal with long wait times for care, etc.

Now, find a garbage truck driver or janitor that developed ALS and received as excellent of treatment, then I will be more willing to accept the argument

Why you talking bad about America like that? Oh wait..its the same on both sides of the ocean.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Analogsoul
Ugggh, I'm sick and tired of right-wing fear mongering regarding the NHS. It's not a perfect system, there isn't such a thing, however it does work in providing health care for every British citizen. To anyone who thinks that the American system is without flaws is seriously deluded. Despite not being perfect, the NHS flaws pale in comparison with the American system. Please read this editorial of an American citizen's exerience with NHS.

Text

You may be right. However, I'm still waiting for a simple chart that outlines what it will cost me and what I will gain through paying this extra cost.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: misle

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: EXman
Go Look up Canada's own #'s on how many CT scanners ond MRI machines they have per person in Canada compared to the US. Then compair wait times. Use the governments numbers.

Are you implying that numbers of machines equates to quality of care? If so, that would contradict most of the available research. As Atul Gwande found in McAllen, Texas increased numbers of imaging machines don't lead to better health outcomes -- although they do seem to seem to improve doctor revenues.

That's why Medicare has proposed changes in MRI payments and would like to thwart self-referrals.

The numbers are shocking.

Which numbers; the Canadian or US? Are you shocked by the fact the Canadians seem to do so well with fewer machines or by the amount of overuse of imaging services in the US by physicians who, having invested in imaging systems, may be overusing them?

I think he's talking about wait times. Supposedly, in Canada, there's always a wait for CT's & MRI's. The quicker the diagnosis, the better the care.

Those are not the only forms of Diagnoses.

Thinking about this and just realized that I'd probably be dead right now if I were in a health care system where there were long waits for MRIs. I had a problem several years ago that was imminently life threatening...my doctor did not realize it until he saw my MRI results...I was given immediate emergency surgery. A 2-week wait would have most likely killed me and I would just be reduced to an anomoly?a statistical wart on the ass of radical health care reform. Just anecdotal crap to some I imagine.

No System would make you wait 2 weeks in that situation. I also suspect your Doctor had a pretty damn good idea what was wrong before the MRI. The MRI probably helped in that case, but most likely just Confirming and/or specifying a certain hunch the Doctor had. I'm not saying MRI's are useless, they just are not as Useful as many seem to think they are.

 

[soulcougher73]

Originally posted by: Analogsoul
Ugggh, I'm sick and tired of right-wing fear mongering regarding the NHS. It's not a perfect system, there isn't such a thing, however it does work in providing health care for every British citizen. To anyone who thinks that the American system is without flaws is seriously deluded. Despite not being perfect, the NHS flaws pale in comparison with the American system. Please read this editorial of an American citizen's exerience with NHS.

Text

Very nice article. Shows the many other side benefits of a UHC system that most never think about.

 

[Analogsoul]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: Analogsoul
Ugggh, I'm sick and tired of right-wing fear mongering regarding the NHS. It's not a perfect system, there isn't such a thing, however it does work in providing health care for every British citizen. To anyone who thinks that the American system is without flaws is seriously deluded. Despite not being perfect, the NHS flaws pale in comparison with the American system. Please read this editorial of an American citizen's exerience with NHS.

Text

You may be right. However, I'm still waiting for a simple chart that outlines what it will cost me and what I will gain through paying this extra cost.

Since we already pay for medicare, which is getting more and more expensive all the time, something needs to be done. Health care cost in the US is getting out of control and the current system we have just isn't cutting it. Perhaps you have good health care now, that's great, but most American's don't have that level of coverage if any.

Personally, I have ok health insurance, but I had to go through a huge rigmarole when I broke my arm and required surgery. I had to wait over a week to get surgery because of the red tape I had to go through and it would probably have taken longer if I didn't push the insurance company to get the approval for it. I mean, I had x-rays from the emergency room clearly showing my broken arm and the need for surgery. In the NHS system, I may still have to wait, but I wouldn't have to deal with the red tape.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: OCguy
I wouldnt be here today if it werent for the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


Prove me wrong.

what are you even saying? that the nih is like a god? The nih is a fantasy? I mean really you fucking moron.

 

[jdjbuffalo]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Everyone always attacks those who are against the current UHC proposal. Obviously if you aren't with the program you are a right wing nutjob. Here is all I want from the supporters. It never gets answered but I will ask again and continue to ask. I figure once a specific answer is given then that means we truly have all the details.

How much will my taxes (fed and/or state) increase if the current bill passes? What is the benefit I gain through this tax increase?

Perhaps if these two simple questions (simple assuming the bill is specific) are answered I can then make an informed decision. Until that time I'm still against the current proposal.

Note: I refer only to the current proposal and not to reform in general.

This one is easy but never talked about.

If it was done right, I'm not saying the way they are doing it now is right, you would pay LESS than you currently are now. Why you ask? Because if you convert the amount of money that companies and employees are paying now and put that towards taxes under a unified system where we can negotiate prices on a national level, we can reduce costs in many areas (pharmaceuticals, new medical devices etc.) . The health insurance in this scenario is obviously either setup as not-for-profit or it's just the federal government.

For those wanting special treatment, immediate services or non-needed cosmetic surgery then there should still be a separate insurance system available for those who want it. This does allow some doctors to make more money as these prices are much higher than what they can charge under the government program.

What I described above is the way the French healthcare system is setup. Theirs is considered the best in the world.

There are some others that are closer to ours but still provide very high quality helathcare. For these look to the German or Swiss systems.

 

[Atreus21]

What is the point of this thread?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: misle

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: EXman
Go Look up Canada's own #'s on how many CT scanners ond MRI machines they have per person in Canada compared to the US. Then compair wait times. Use the governments numbers.

Are you implying that numbers of machines equates to quality of care? If so, that would contradict most of the available research. As Atul Gwande found in McAllen, Texas increased numbers of imaging machines don't lead to better health outcomes -- although they do seem to seem to improve doctor revenues.

That's why Medicare has proposed changes in MRI payments and would like to thwart self-referrals.

The numbers are shocking.

Which numbers; the Canadian or US? Are you shocked by the fact the Canadians seem to do so well with fewer machines or by the amount of overuse of imaging services in the US by physicians who, having invested in imaging systems, may be overusing them?

I think he's talking about wait times. Supposedly, in Canada, there's always a wait for CT's & MRI's. The quicker the diagnosis, the better the care.

Those are not the only forms of Diagnoses.

Thinking about this and just realized that I'd probably be dead right now if I were in a health care system where there were long waits for MRIs. I had a problem several years ago that was imminently life threatening...my doctor did not realize it until he saw my MRI results...I was given immediate emergency surgery. A 2-week wait would have most likely killed me and I would just be reduced to an anomoly?a statistical wart on the ass of radical health care reform. Just anecdotal crap to some I imagine.

No System would make you wait 2 weeks in that situation. I also suspect your Doctor had a pretty damn good idea what was wrong before the MRI. The MRI probably helped in that case, but most likely just Confirming and/or specifying a certain hunch the Doctor had. I'm not saying MRI's are useless, they just are not as Useful as many seem to think they are.

Perhaps I wasn't very clear or glossed it over a little too much in order to spare you the details. My doctor ran a ton of tests (all were scheduled on a nonemergency basis with waiting periods of 1 to 4 weeks depending on the test)...conducted over about 9 months. He couldn't figure out what was wrong...the MRI was a stab in the dark and essentially a test of last resort having exhausted all other possibilities. I waited my turn in the scheduling (about 1 or 2 weeks) and was not given emergency status for an immediate scan.

Please know that my doctor had no reason to assume that I had a life threatening situation and was in danger of imminent death...he had no idea what was wrong with me before the MRI or how serious it was. Maybe MRIs are not as useful as many think they are...but in my case, an MRI saved my life. Like I said...just anecdotal crap to some I imagine.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: jdjbuffalo

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Everyone always attacks those who are against the current UHC proposal. Obviously if you aren't with the program you are a right wing nutjob. Here is all I want from the supporters. It never gets answered but I will ask again and continue to ask. I figure once a specific answer is given then that means we truly have all the details.

How much will my taxes (fed and/or state) increase if the current bill passes? What is the benefit I gain through this tax increase?

Perhaps if these two simple questions (simple assuming the bill is specific) are answered I can then make an informed decision. Until that time I'm still against the current proposal.

Note: I refer only to the current proposal and not to reform in general.

This one is easy but never talked about.

If it was done right, I'm not saying the way they are doing it now is right, you would pay LESS than you currently are now.

(Cut some out, not that I didn't read/agree but just for space...)

If it was done right is the key. I'm very concerned. No one wants to talk about the individual cost, only the great societal benefit. Why is this not being discussed???

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan



Thinking about this and just realized that I'd probably be dead right now if I were in a health care system where there were long waits for MRIs. I had a problem several years ago that was imminently life threatening...my doctor did not realize it until he saw my MRI results...I was given immediate emergency surgery. A 2-week wait would have most likely killed me and I would just be reduced to an anomoly?a statistical wart on the ass of radical health care reform. Just anecdotal crap to some I imagine.

No System would make you wait 2 weeks in that situation. I also suspect your Doctor had a pretty damn good idea what was wrong before the MRI. The MRI probably helped in that case, but most likely just Confirming and/or specifying a certain hunch the Doctor had. I'm not saying MRI's are useless, they just are not as Useful as many seem to think they are.

Perhaps I wasn't very clear or glossed it over a little too much in order to spare you the details. My doctor ran a ton of tests (all were scheduled on a nonemergency basis with waiting periods of 1 to 4 weeks depending on the test)...conducted over about 9 months. He couldn't figure out what was wrong...the MRI was a stab in the dark and essentially a test of last resort having exhausted all other possibilities. I waited my turn in the scheduling (about 1 or 2 weeks) and was not given emergency status for an immediate scan.

Please know that my doctor had no reason to assume that I had a life threatening situation and was in danger of imminent death...he had no idea what was wrong with me before the MRI or how serious it was. Maybe MRIs are not as useful as many think they are...but in my case, an MRI saved my life. Like I said...just anecdotal crap to some I imagine.

Thanks for clearing it up.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: Analogsoul
Ugggh, I'm sick and tired of right-wing fear mongering regarding the NHS. It's not a perfect system, there isn't such a thing, however it does work in providing health care for every British citizen. To anyone who thinks that the American system is without flaws is seriously deluded. Despite not being perfect, the NHS flaws pale in comparison with the American system. Please read this editorial of an American citizen's exerience with NHS.

Text

You may be right. However, I'm still waiting for a simple chart that outlines what it will cost me and what I will gain through paying this extra cost.

I would like to see that as well. For what I pay for healthcare, I receive excellent treatment. I have no confidence in the U.S. Government not to waste my taxpayer dollars.

I have seen UHC fail on a State level and have no wish to go down that road in such a hurry.