Page 13 of 143 FirstFirst ... 3891011121314151617182363113 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 260 of 2855
  1. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #241  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    The Cuba argument really doesn't make the case that our health care system isn't broken.
    By the way, that's a case of changing the argument midstream. I wasn't arguing that our health care system isn't broken. I was arguing your assertion that other countries do health care "better".
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #242  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    That's a cop out.

    Infant mortality is one accepted standardized measure of healthcare, and it shows the U.S. behind all of the countries you are stating have a lesser quality of healthcare.

    Now what other metric would you like to determine whether that may or may not be accurate?
    Where did I say all of the countries have a lesser quality of healthcare?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #243  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Do you have a metric for OVERALL healthcare efficacy? That's the point being debated.
    No, thats the point you keep hammering on.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #244  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Sure: Public Favors Obama's Health-Care Plan - ABC News

    Now can you offer a shred of data to support your position regarding why our system is superior to those other countries with a public option? You've discounted citizen surveys, and believe that infant mortality isn't valid, then what is a valid measure of health care quality? "Degree of American-ness?"
    Bujin, I didn't say things like that. And I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth. Go build a losing argument for someone else. I'm tired of your game.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  5. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #245  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    By the way, that's a case of changing the argument midstream. I wasn't arguing that our health care system isn't broken. I was arguing your assertion that other countries do health care "better".
    That's bujin's and daThomas's tactic. If you don't like someones argument, change it to something you like better. They seem to be on the "rating the US healthcare against the rest of the world" bend atm. Thats another thread guys. Go start one, ok?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  6. #246  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    That's bujin's and daThomas's tactic. If you don't like someones argument, change it to something you like better. They seem to be on the "rating the US healthcare against the rest of the world" bend atm. Thats another thread guys. Go start one, ok?
    You made the case that we needed to "learn from other country's mistakes", and "we all know how well the rest of the industrialized world's healthcare systems run. Not."

    You make these broad generalizations, with no data that our system outperforms other countries. In fact, cost / mortality / life expectancy strongly indicate otherwise.

    So, I'm sorry if you don't like my points, but I didn't change in the argument at all....I simply called you on the fact that you make broad conclusions with no support. Since data obviously doesn't matter much to you when it conflicts with your "common sense" (in other words, when it conflicts with your preconceived ideology), I can see why you're not convinced.

    I'm also sorry if you don't feel that I'm welcome on this thread. I guess I didn't realize that this thread was only for your ill-conceived, fact-less conclusions. I humbly apologize.

    I will, however, leave you with a parting gift, courtesy of the World Health Org: http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
    Last edited by Bujin; 06/26/2009 at 09:48 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  7. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #247  
    The hidden patients on hospital waiting lists

    Internal hospital documents seen by The Age show that at the end of September last year, 7268 people were waiting for treatment, but only 2487 of them were on the official elective surgery waiting list. A State Opposition analysis of the documents, obtained under freedom of information laws, shows the average waiting time for elective surgery at the Royal Melbourne in September was 235 days.

    But one patient had been waiting seven years for a varicose veins operation. A semi-urgent patient had been waiting 1437 days for exploratory surgery on the large intestine, while another patient had been waiting 1157 days for a radiological procedure.

    Nearly 130 people had been waiting for more than two years.

    The documents show that as well as the 2487 people on the official waiting list, there were 1061 patients needing an operation but not recorded on the list because they had been deemed "not ready" for surgery.

    Another 2246 people were waiting for a range of procedures including diagnostic and recurring treatments such as dialysis which are not recorded on the official waiting list because they are deemed not to take up significant operating resources at the hospital.

    A further 1474 were on the Royal Melbourne's list of outpatients people who have been given an appointment to see a hospital-based specialist and are waiting to see them. Outpatients on average spent 65 days between getting an appointment and seeing a specialist. One outpatient had been waiting 783 days to see a neurosurgery specialist.
    *emphasis added
  8. #248  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    Yes, because we all know that clinicians, administrators and other healthcare workers are all saints who work out of the goodness of their hearts and don't care how much or little they get paid.
    And what do the healthcare workers in European systems work for? The gratitude? NO. They get paid.

    Try again please.
  9. #249  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    But the people supplying the numbers often do. Case in point: Cuba.
    Ok, so the CIA is lying about Cuba having a lower infant mortality rate. Sure. They'd do that.
  10. #250  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Where did I say all of the countries have a lesser quality of healthcare?
    Your argument has repeatedly been that the "socialist medicine" countries have a lower overall quality of care and that a U.S. gov't OPTION will lead us to that lower quality.

    Please don't try to pretend you have not.
  11. #251  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    No, thats the point you keep hammering on.
    No, that's the metric that is necessary to have this discussion and you want to keep avoiding a metric to compare the U.S. system with.

    I don't blame you for your avoidance.
  12. #252  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    Minor examples. Equally negative examples can be spotlighted on the illness for profit side.

    Let's all agree on a metric(s) to compare overall national healthcare efficacy for the general populous and continue this discussion based on that.

    It's the only way this topic will lead anywhere. Unless you just wish to keep the discussion fogged.
  13. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #253  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Ok, so the CIA is lying about Cuba having a lower infant mortality rate. Sure. They'd do that.
    Please read the following posts where I addressed that.
  14. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #254  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Minor examples. Equally negative examples can be spotlighted on the illness for profit side.

    Let's all agree on a metric(s) to compare overall national healthcare efficacy for the general populous and continue this discussion based on that.

    It's the only way this topic will lead anywhere. Unless you just wish to keep the discussion fogged.
    And what would those be? I already showed how your data on infant mortality is flawed.

    EDIT: By the way, whether it's a minor example kind of depends on whether you're one of the people waiting over 200 days for surgery.
    Last edited by groovy; 06/26/2009 at 11:54 PM.
  15. #255  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    And what would those be? I already showed how your data on infant mortality is flawed.

    EDIT: By the way, whether it's a minor example kind of depends on whether you're one of the people waiting over 200 days for surgery.
    So what you are saying is, there is no way to compare healthcare on a metric because all the data is flawed. Any further discussion is flawed because the data is flawed.

    But somehow your data of waiting over 200 days for surgery isn't flawed.

    Honestly, what sense does that make?
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  16. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #256  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    So what you are saying is, there is no way to compare healthcare on a metric because all the data is flawed. Any further discussion is flawed because the data is flawed.

    But somehow your data of waiting over 200 days for surgery isn't flawed.

    Honestly, what sense does that make?
    I didn't say all of the data is flawed. I did say that using infant mortality, as it's being defined in various countries, is flawed. I'm open to other suggestions.
  17. #257  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    I didn't say all of the data is flawed. I did say that using infant mortality, as it's being defined in various countries, is flawed. I'm open to other suggestions.
    You may not have said it, but to me you are implying it. At this point, I doubt there is any data you won't find flawed.

    This whole thread is turning into an ideological debate rather than a factual debate.
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  18. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #258  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    You may not have said it, but to me you are implying it. At this point, I doubt there is any data you won't find flawed.

    This whole thread is turning into an ideological debate rather than a factual debate.
    Well, I'm sorry you inferred that I wouldn't be receptive to any data. That would be quite foolish of me. However, isn't it fair to point out when data is flawed?
  19. #259  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    Well, I'm sorry you inferred that I wouldn't be receptive to any data. That would be quite foolish of me. However, isn't it fair to point out when data is flawed?
    It's always fair to point out spuriousness in data.

    I'll just sit back and watch what happens to the next set of comparable statistics.
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  20. #260  
    Goodness, we have been busy today. Of the 40-50 million listed below, I sort of wonder what the number is of those people who do not want insurance because they do not need insurance. Why have something if there is no need for it. If it were not for my wife's condition, I would not have insurance because I do not need it. When the need for it arises, I may consider it.

    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    Random example:
    People without direct access to heathcare in the USA, 40-50 million.
    People without direct access to heathcare in France, zero.

    In defense of the USA, it is not the policy of the federal or state governments to insure access to quality healthcare for all of it's citizens.

Posting Permissions