eulero83
Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44 you'll have to point out the connection between three things. one is, how socialized medicine directly leads to more hospital beds. and two, given the double-edged sword of staying in hospitals, how having 1 more bed per thousand people is ALWAYS a good thing. relatedly, does this apparent "shortage" of one bed per thousand somehow translate into less care? you're not being put in an hospital if it's not necessary and we do not build infrastructures in our NHS for fun, I would like to know also if they counted provate hospitals too becuse surprise Italy is not a socialist country so there are private facilities and it's a choice where to go, beds per capita just translates in care for more peoples and a stronger system in preventing helth related problems and more accessibility. quote:
this argument can be attached to all your points---how is it that socialized medicine directly leads to that? if you cannot make the link, holding other factors constant, then its a bad use of statistics. in this case in particular, there is no universal standard for recording infant mortality rate and you can only compare numbers between countries if you are assured that each country is using the same standard. yes there is a universal standards for recording infant mortality rate you count how many babies are born in one year and how many of those dies before turning 1 year old and how many get to 5 years old as simple as that in the us as in italy, we are not a far distant country that does not a census and doesn't collect statistics the same way other western countries do, our scientific and medical scenes are connected and comunicating since the end of ww2. What you might be confused with is maternal dath rate or the rate of pregnancy related death of the mather, this is trickier because what defines pregancy related can be arbitrary for example post partum depression suciedes, also some countries take track of just the earliest 42 days other a while 1 year other just the deaths occured during birth. By the way considering the same standard in italy is 9 out of 100 000 births in the USA is 25, this is due to obesity and an higher number of not necessary c-sections that is actualy tipical of private facilities who charge more for that and ironically have less economical liabilities chosing the procedure. Back to infant mortality rate I guess it's not relevant only if you think outcomes are not a valid measure of a system and you only evaluate the service recieved when things go fine and you do not care at all to be ripped off, not the actual care. 1 year infant mortality rate us 5.8/1000 births it 3.3/1000 births cia world facts book 5 year infant mortality rate us 7/1000 births it 4/1000 births world bank so you also have a higher rate of infant mortlity among the 1-5year olders but I guess that's gun related. quote:
see first point above. also, mortality rates are determined by reckoning all kinds of death---accidents, murders, military, etc---things that are demographically related and have nothing to do with health care. yes you are right the difference is probably pollution and violence related quote:
lifestyle choices. all of Europe (and indeed most of the world) compares favorably to America in this regard. not completely, it's true that Italy is a much image aware and less politically correct society so fat shaming is not seen as a problem but a reality check, on the other side again if in your view health care system includes just the visits to doctors or hospitals yes but for us it's a system and it also controls food quality, that being able to see a general practicioner wothout copay might have more chances to hear your liver turned into paté. quote:
this is a function of the medical schools not allowing more physicians. in a more free market, more people would be doctors. the same here I guess the difference is about general practicioners that here are an integral part of the system quote:
lifestyle choices. prevention quote:
our healthcare is expensive because its the more technologically advanced, regulations and insurance drive up costs, and supply is somewhat artificially restricted. bullshit we are not a third world country we have tecnology and also industries that produce said tecnology on our territory this is just propaganda, you jast have bigger real estate investments by health care providers, bullshit we have more regulations and less costs, insurance can drive up the costs because your is NOT A FREE MARKET the buyer can't refuse to buy the product it's not a pair of fancy shoes, when the alternative is to die this change so much the demand and supply curves that crushes them, no it's not artifically restricted it's just how you maximize the profit in your system and private initiaive will never invest in the care of the lowest incomes it's more profitable to manufacture fancy shoes at that point. quote:
all that said---statistics do not address the philosophical position that rejects socialized medicine, which is a matter of personal liberty and resistance to government coercion. why are you all convinced that if there is a public option this will kill the private market? There are private facilities in Italy and sectors where care is provided mainly by privates like dental care or psicological care, in other cases as many people still choose the public sector over the private one, mri for example the private hospitals reservs certain percentage of their services for the national health care service, this looks like more choices to me you are coerced into one choice. I'm also by the way I was free to start a business without the concern about jeopardizing my health care or the one of my loved ones, or an employer has no power of life and death over unhappy employees, and this is freedom. quote:
if people are given the choice between being more free, having more of their own dollars and living until 79, as opposed to being less free and having less of their own dollars and living until 82--many people will pick the 79 option, and they are not wrong, selfish, heartless or greedy to do so. You are almost right they are not wrong, selfish, heartless or greedy to do so... as you have not more of your dollars as you get ripped off by both insurances and providers well they are wrong, selfish, stupid, simpleminded and greedy.
|