Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 8,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
Only a pedant would say that the technicalities of a system are more important than its total aggregate results. Kind of like "the operation was a success but the patient is dead."
(my emphasis)
My point is that measures like life expectancy, infant mortality, etc. are not just "its" (the health care system's) results. These results substantially reflect many things that are unrelated to patient care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
At the same time, it appears that Europeans have even more significant "unfair disadvantages" by smoking more, etc. So the knife cuts on both sides.
Yes, and if I could show you much higher mortality from lung cancer in Europe, would that tend to show that the U.S. heath care system is better at diagnosing and treating lung cancer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
By the way, how do figure coming in dead last in preventable deaths is just because of too many McFlurries?
Not sure -- do deaths resulting from complications from obesity and lack of exercise count as "preventable"? I suspect they do, and we can't really blame the health care system for those.
You seem to want to have a technical discussion about a narrowly defined abstract concept of your own definition -- while conveniently ignoring lots of pain and suffering and without understanding the linked reports.
I would like to have a human discussion about how citizens can become healthier, happier and live longer.
You seem to want to make excuses for the meaningless of generally accepted standards of comparison between the different health outcomes of different nations.
I would like to learn from the comparisons, examine contructive solutions for the future and encourage action to be taken.
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 8,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
You seem to want to have a technical discussion about a narrowly defined abstract concept of your own definition -- while conveniently ignoring lots of pain and suffering and without understanding the linked reports.
I would like to have a human discussion about how citizens can become healthier, happier and live longer.
You seem to want to make excuses for the meaningless of generally accepted standards of comparison between the different health outcomes of different nations.
I would like to learn from the comparisons, examine contructive solutions for the future and encourage action to be taken.
Forgive me, I misunderstood you. I thought you wanted to discuss the quality of the U.S. heatlhcare system relative to those of other nations. Next time I'll search your heart before responding.
Except, of course, they are. They're subsidized and heavily regulated. One can, and should, question whethe they're the RIGHT subsidies and regulation (or even DECENT ones[*]), but it's disingenuous in the extreme to claim that they're not "subject to government funding."
If we're going to accept that things like foot stamps, farm subsidies, section 8, and FHA consist of universal food/housing, then America already has UHS in the form or Medicare, Medicaid, ER's, etc....
But advocates take the position that none of those count as UHS because they feel it's insufficient in quality and has that deal breaker of requiring the beneficiary be actually needy and poor before they receive public funds.
Forgive me, I misunderstood you. I thought you wanted to discuss the quality of the U.S. heatlhcare system relative to those of other nations. Next time I'll search your heart before responding.
If you wanted to show the the childcare and educational system was better in one country or another would you look at the end result of what became of the children (are they happy, well adjusted, mature reasonable adults) and what the knowledge the actually can apply (objective test scores, prepared for work or university, the ability to reason, critical thinking skills, lifelong learning, landing on their feet) or would you look at micro "child intervention outcomes" and "classroom discussion techniques" perhaps both, but not the details without looking at the whole and the final outcomes.
I notice that you left out the question of whether the end result is competent and productive adults.
That's because America went through the phase of affirming the self-confidence of students and found that the kids most happy and confident about themselves are those with the lowest test scores. Ignorance does correlate with bliss.
Objectively speaking, European national educational systems can be shown to create inferior results by measure of the quantity of top research institutions, scientific output, economic productivity, and military-political power.
Logically, the European model would be discarded in favor of a more effective approach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
Some Americans claim that the comparisons are not fair because health is influenced by other factors -- yet they are unwilling for those other factors to be put on the table.
Comparisons which adjust for demographics show no such difference in outcome.
For example, the health conditions in which America exceeds others (diabetes, heart condition) kill patients early - usually by their 50's. The life expectancy of people who make it past 60, with or without Medicare, is comparable with European averages.
There are examples of significantly worse health care system, for example the significantly worse mortality rate of breast cancer patients in Netherlands by comparison to its neighbors. There's a case where the demographics can be normalized easily to demonstrate how the women die in larger numbers when treated by the Dutch medical system as opposed to, say, the Belgian hospitals.
Forgive me, I misunderstood you. I thought you wanted to discuss the quality of the U.S. heatlhcare system relative to those of other nations. Next time I'll search your heart before responding.
The title of the thread is "Do those who Parrot the Claim that the US has the Best Health Care believe their own BS?
You are the one who keeps going on about "systems" divorced of their impact on people and the irrelevancy or incomparability of results and costs.
The title of the thread is "Do those who Parrot the Claim that the US has the Best Health Care believe their own BS?
You are the one who keeps going on about "systems" divorced of their impact on people and the irrelevancy or incomparability of results and costs.
Want a cracker?
That's because you are the one who made the mistake.
Kristof compared health care systems. You are the one who clipped off the relevant part in order to peddle a separate line of bird feed which parrots might find attractive.
That's because you are the one who made the mistake.
Kristof compared health care systems. You are the one who clipped off the relevant part in order to peddle a separate line of bird feed which parrots might find attractive.
Well, perhaps you should post a comment on Kristof's newspapers' site if you don't like the topic of the thread here?
The desire to compartmentalize and create artificial boundaries explains a lot of the woes of Americans and their poor health care.
Does your health care system provide effective treatments for intrusive obsessions?
Do you feel intruded upon?
Or, is it easier to make a cute comment or a veiled attack than to honestly address the issues raised?
How do you define " health care system "?
What does it include and what does it exclude?
Where does it begin and where does it end?
What is your definition of an " effective treatment? "
What measures do you consider valid measures for " health care systems?"
How are these different for measures of " health care ?"
Is health care possible without a health care system?
Can a country have the best health care even if it doesn't achieve the best health care outcomes ?
Well, perhaps you should post a comment on Kristof's newspapers' site if you don't like the topic of the thread here?
The desire to compartmentalize and create artificial boundaries explains a lot of the woes of Americans and their poor health care.
You apparently lost track.
Kristof = health care system = correct reference
Klm is Dead = health care (no system) = faulty reference
Let us review - you quoted an op-ed piece which made comparisons (invalid) between health care systems and crafted a thread title which left off the reference to "system".
When someone replied on the basis of the actual op-ed, you jumped all over him - claiming that the thread was just about health care but not the system.
He was on topic - you.... Well, it's not certain you even understood the topic Kristof was on given how you seem to only parrot the party-line of the UHS advocacy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
Is health care possible without a health care system?
Yes. Medical treatment exists separately from the system which delivers it. Confusing the two is the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
Can a country have the best health care even if it doesn't achieve the best health care outcomes ?
Can a city have the best food in the country even though there are malnourished people? Yes.
Can a neighborhood have the best house even if there are homeless people? Yes.
Can a country have the best military even if it doesn't have the best paid soldiers? Yes.
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 8,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
Do you feel intruded upon?
No, I'm feeling the effects of Chimay at the moment. Now I will concede that this stuff is far better than any American beer or ale. Add that to the many American woes.
What you don't seem to get is that I was critiquing Kristof's argument, with no hidden agenda. I'm not about to argue that our health care system is that great, overall. My views aside, Kristof does a very poor job of supporting his conclusion.
No, I'm feeling the effects of Chimay at the moment. Now I will concede that this stuff is far better than any American beer or ale. Add that to the many American woes.
What you don't seem to get is that I was critiquing Kristof's argument, with no hidden agenda. I'm not about to argue that our health care system is that great, overall. My views aside, Kristof does a very poor job of supporting his conclusion.
Ah, yes, the joys of Chimay. And La Chouffe. Or a Westmalle Dubbel for that matter.
You seem to understand very well this aspect of how to take care of your health (assuming you are not having six of them at a sitting).
It is almost a certainty that the difference between health care / a nation's care of health and its "health care system" is not lost on you either.
I do find the discussion fascinating, this idea of questioning or rejecting the validity of looking at aggregate measures. To me it comes across a bit like saying that you shouldn't consider such aggregate, outcome measures such as customer equity, profitability, cash flow, earnings per share, share price, etc. when evaluating the performance of a corporation since a corporation's performance on these measures is dependent on so many external forces outside of its control. Instead you should just look at the internal customer service queue length for several divisions and product lines and the resolution of specific call center problem tickets focusing just on those which are most favorable for the corporation.
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 8,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klm is Dead - Long Live KLM
I do find the discussion fascinating, this idea of questioning or rejecting the validity of looking at aggregate measures.
No, I'm not rejecting the validity of looking at aggregate measures, generally. My point is that in this instance, the aggregate measure substantially reflects factors beyond the scope of the system in question -- here, the U.S. health care system.
I think you get what I'm talking about, since you brought up the higher smoking rates in Europe. Surely you see that higher rates of lung cancer deaths in Europe (aggregate data) are not simply a reflection of European health care for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer.
