Why is the US ranked 37th for quality of health care?

[KurskKnyaz]

Originally posted by: nealh

Originally posted by: Eeezee
I don't have anything else to add. Why are we ranked so poorly, and what can be done to improve this ranking?

"Many of our so called uninsured would rather buy cigs, cellphones, beer, big screen TVs etc...I see plenty of people who are young who feel they have no need for insurance. How about those nice young diabetics who do not take care of themsleves at all....then 10yrs later they have a heart attack, stroke, etc . If you think this would not obscure this types of reports you are naive. This is just one disease where patients are non-compliant. In our country we have lost our sense of personal responsibility and want to blame everyone else. Many of our problems are from wanting what we cant have and we will spend to get it even if we will never be able to afford.

I heard Rush make the same argument. Are you aware that a month's supply of certain cancer medication costs more than a big screen TV.

This kind of ranking are for the most part BS

Nope, its not. US and Cuba have about the same infant mortality rate.

 

[ProfJohn]

The 37 ranking comes from the World Health Organization, which should be the first warning.

On that list we rank lower than Costa Rica, Dominica, Morocco, Columbia, Oman??

The list is a socialists dream:
Fairness of financial contribution- in other words unless only the rich pay you have a bad system, we rank 54.
Distribution of Health in the Populations- again unless the rich and the poor are both equally healthy or sick you rank low.

Google and read the report and see for yourself its socialist view.

 

[ProfJohn]

Oh... BTW the ranking is not for 'quality of healthcare.'

Based on that alone we would rank much higher. It is instead a broad based approach that includes who pays for healthcare etc etc.

It is a ranking of healthcare systems, not the quality of the care actually given.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
pharmas spend more on advertising than research, so lets just drop that strawman now.

Yes, and that advertising needs to stop. I fully support that because it's absolutely ludicrous. If a drug is effective, doctors will use it. Or, do we not trust doctors anymore?

what we shoudl be asking is why do we have such mediocre heatlhcare when we pay for more than anywhere else.

We pay more for a lot of things in this country than elsewhere because we don't subsidize it. Ever seen the price of a gallon of gas in Iran?

while the bumpersticker replies in this thread try to make this out to be a small, simple issue, what we actually have is a series of problems, each contributing to less efficient service and lower quality care. To keep this to the point, i will stick to short points:

1) healthy patients are not profitable, treating symptoms is more profitable than curing problems. Malaria kills millions annually, instead we fix old men's broken dicks. No-one will make money off a cure for malaria, so noone tries to cure it.

Here's a list of currently available cures for malaria, from the CDC:
chloroquine
sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (Fansidar®)
mefloquine (Lariam®)
atovaquone-proguanil (Malarone®)
quinine
doxycycline
artemisin derivatives (not licensed for use in the United States, but often found overseas)

Malaria is about access to medical care, not the availability of medicines to combat it.

2) drug advertisements lead to hypochondriacs. People seek drugs for things like rls that aren't even real systems, and think they need drugs for all sorts of non-issues. Instead of explaining why they don't need a given drug, its easier to just write them a prescription.

Anything labeled a "syndrome" is BS with a few exceptions. Yes, patients are stupid. I agree.

3) Lack of preventative care. Enough said.

4) Unhealthy lifestyles. The automobile/fastfood lifestyle has greatly contributed to our national weight problem, which in turn has turned into a healthcare fiasco.

#3 and #4 are part of the same problem. People don't take care of themselves, eat like crap, sit around watching TV and then expect everything to be fine. If everything is more or less fine, they don't seek medical care -- why fix what isn't broken? That has little to do with the medical care available and everything to do with the lackadaisical attitude of people with regard to their health. Who is responsible for your health -- your doctor or yourself?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: AndrewR
#3 and #4 are part of the same problem. People don't take care of themselves, eat like crap, sit around watching TV and then expect everything to be fine. If everything is more or less fine, they don't seek medical care -- why fix what isn't broken? That has little to do with the medical care available and everything to do with the lackadaisical attitude of people with regard to their health. Who is responsible for your health -- your doctor or yourself?

the doctors told us for a century that they are.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: AndrewR
#3 and #4 are part of the same problem. People don't take care of themselves, eat like crap, sit around watching TV and then expect everything to be fine. If everything is more or less fine, they don't seek medical care -- why fix what isn't broken? That has little to do with the medical care available and everything to do with the lackadaisical attitude of people with regard to their health. Who is responsible for your health -- your doctor or yourself?

the doctors told us for a century that they are.

Would you propose the Medical Police that will arrest people and force them to go to the doctor?