adehbone Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 2. Where would WORLD health care be without US > innovations? I would reach out and say that many > of the innovations are born because of our > structure. I am not sure of this but no one ever > seems to bring this up. > > They would be just fine as Asia, Germany, Sweden, > Norway can provide the same and better innovations > than the USA and guess what their structure is not > super flawed. > > Also have you done a survey to see if Germany, > Sweden, Norway etc are pulling the plug on people? > Or you seriously think that US hospitals are that > much more advanced? you missed my point entirely 
I never said they are less advanced, free riding perhaps, but not advanced. Again- I specifically stated that I do not know where the majority of medical breakthroughs come from- just said it should be considered in the conversation. and the life expectancy differential between bottom and top socioeconomic quintiles in US vs Sweden is the same. Again showing that it is not health care, but rather an unhealthy lifestyle that leads us to be behind other developed nations. I never said that they pull the plug on grandma- I really wish people could actually read the posts people put on here. What I did note is that the vast majority of publicly funded systems would not be as quick to do the type of (expensive) and sophisticated testing for simple issues that we do here. When things are free they become scarce and need to be controlled- that it a simple fact and why we so often hear about the long waits for MRIās and other diagnostic tests in Canada and the UK. That is also why they have less MRIās and other expensive equipment per capita. This will happen here- and I donāt necessarily know its a bad thing since we over treat everything leading to higher costs.
akanska Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > marcus phoenix - do you have a response to my > point? > > Also- I forgot to respond to your comment: > > āBS most of the innovations come from publicly > funded universities and research institutions - > the things you love to hate.ā > > where did I say I hate them? I said our āsystemā > as is spurs innovation and R&D. This includes > universities, grant receiving research facilities, > the NIH, etc. The point I was making was that our > system seems to be facilitating a lot. Akanska the thing is that most cancer patients can extend their lives by not just a couple of weeks but upto a few years thanks to technological advances. Maybe by that time they will be able to develop a cure for the ailment. Is it worth the chance? Heck yes. If you simply let them die, where is the incentive to cure the disease? Might as well let anyone who has a currently incurable disease die as well. Why bother doing any research? The problem I see with our structure that leads to these exorbitant costs is the fact that there are too many middle men who make a ton of money and produce nothing or real value to our country. As adehbone pointed out, other countries are making excellent strides in medical innovation as well; we cannot just rest on what we have done so far. They have far simpler structures in place, eliminate most middle men between the doctor and patient and thus are able to keep the costs down.
To your first point- I agree, but the stats show that the proportion of medicare spending on the last weeks is dramatically high. ~40% I think? So what would you do? And I donāt mean you are 50 and have prostate cancer. I mean you are 85, have had all sorts of issues and a doctor tells you you have 2 weeks and that w/ 100k treatment X you have a 15% chance of extending that to 2 months. Say you have the cash and a couple grand kids. Does your decision change if youāve be paying out of pocket vs not? Itās really tough huh? What about those who are brain dead? Would that come from public dollars or private? I agree with your last point completely and thats my issue with this bill- it does NOTHING to make that happen. I like you almost want to say that a minimal public option is better, but that brings in all the questions above and who decided what is rationed and what is not.
akanska Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > 2. Where would WORLD health care be without US > innovations? I would reach out and say that many > of the innovations are born because of our > structure. I am not sure of this but no one ever > seems to bring this up. > I think a more appropriate question is where would world healthcare be without US consumers, including the US government, subsidizing the cost of the worldās pharmaceuticals? A very large part of the reason medical care is so much cheaper in Europe and Canada is that pharmaceutical costs are capped and/or purchased at a bulk discount by government agencies. These lost profits are recouped by the pharmaceutical companies by charging exorbitant prices in the US. To my knowledge, and please correct me if Iām wrong, this bill does not lift the ban on Medicare negotiating with drug companies for volume discounts, does not lift the ban on the reimportation of pharmaceuticals (something several border towns have been doing illegally for years), and does not cap pharmaceutical prices in the US. While Iām not a fan of the government telling companies what they can charge for their products, Iām even less a fan of US consumers paying more for the same product because other countriesā governments have capped prices on those products. It would be interesting to see how well things worked out if the US capped drug prices at 95% of the European price. How many new drugs would be developed under that scenario? How great would the European healthcare systems be if they actually had to foot the bill for their share? I have no problem providing some subsidies to poor nations, but there is no reason that the US should subsidize the European healtcare system.
^^ thats what I was trying to find out about and what I meant about free riding.
Nice thread. Really good insights and done in a cordial manner. Well done.
Shut up JustPass, youāre an idiotā¦
just kidding
Thatās a very interesting point about the rest of the world free-riding on US healthcare spend. I suspect it is true, as it is at least to some extent of US national defence expenditure. Anyone work in research covering big pharma know what % of global profits are made in the US? My guess is that it is very large. What would happen to R&D spend if the US cut their health expenditure to Euro/Canadian levels? USA must spend 20% of GDP on health and defence. In Europe, Japan, Canada itās probably half that. Thatās a nice free lunch if you can get it by piggybacking on American taxpayers.
hey
Iād like live notifications for replies to my posts. As for the Health Bill, Iām still looking into it, but Iāll make my decision based on the full details. Whatās your take on it?
One take is why is Pharma different. When a company sells goods in an export market at below the price it sells them at home, itās called dumping.
If Ford started selling cars at marginal cost in export markets, those countries would be up in arms.
Yet when itās prescription meds, other countries seem to insist that they get those meds at marginal cost, so that US consumers are left to pay for R&D.
Maybe Bobby Kennedy can bring in single pricing