Re: Death Panels

The basic difference between the two of you is that one is prepared to accept slightly lower outcomes for those currently covered, to gain the benefit of cover 100% of the population. Where as the other believes that the individual outcome is more important than that for the population in general.B oth are reasonable POV.

The difference is not that Canada spends less and gets lower outcomes, that not really surprising, the difference is that for a few % point drop in outcome you get to cover 100%, and not 80% of the population, who have some sort of medical cover in the US.

So where as in Canada the 53% survival rate 5-years after treatment presumable covers 100% of the men who get cancer. The 57% survival rate only covers the 80% who get treated in the US, which if treated as a % of the whole population is only 46%.

So the choice for the individual who has cover is to stay as you are and have a 4% better chance of survival. But the choice for the population might be better served to go for the Canadian Model for cancer care, where 7% more people will survive cancer.

Steve Cooper

Andre Lieven wrote:
On Sep 8, 5:23 pm, "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 14:05:46 -0700 (PDT), Andre Lieven

<andrelie...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 30, 11:51 pm, se...@xxxxxxxxx (Seth) wrote:
Andre Lieven <andrelie...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Given that the average Canadian outlives the average USian, the issue
of does public health care, in any way, cut people's life expectancy
is at full variance with the facts.
Given that the average American *with cancer* outlives the average
Canadian or European *with cancer*, under the assumption that cancer
survival is primarily due to health care, we see that US health care
is _better_ than Canadian or European.
5-Year survival rates:
All Cancers Colon Cancer
Men Women
American 66% 63% 62%
European 47% 56% 43%
British 45% 53%
(Different study, different time period)
US 57% 61%
Canada 53% 58%
Five year relative breast cancer survival rates from CONCORD study.
Rank.......Country........mean (95% confidence interval)
1..........Cuba...........84.0 (82.9, 85.2)
2..........US.............83.9 (83.7, 84.1)
3..........Canada.........82.5 (81.9, 83.0)
4..........Sweden.........82.0 (81.2, 82.7)
5..........Japan..........81.6 (79.5, 83.5)
6..........Australia.. ...80.7 (80.1, 81.3)
8..........France.........79.8 (78.2, 81.4)
22.........England........69.8 (69.5, 70.2)
So, it is your claim that the US paying 50% MORE for it's health
care is justified by a 1.8% improvement in cancer survival ?
I am very glad that you will never do my taxes... Since you clearly
failed Basic Arithmetic.
Sounds like Andre believes in Death Panels.

As Congressman Barney Frank told that other nut, what colour
is the sky on your world ?

Further, the correlation between a SLIGHTLY higher cancer
survival rate and spending a LOT more on for-profit health
care remains UNPROVEN.

Thank you for proof of your latest ASSumption...

"It's just too expensive to keep you alive, sir... sorry."

Bull***. You sound like the wingnutters who also demand that
the "guvmint keep their hands off my Medicare".

Insanity.

Andre
.

Loading