NYTimescare
DON SURBER BLOG
In an editorial today, the New York Times tries to take a report that "shows" America is 42nd in the world in health care to make the argument that we need to nationalize the health care industry. The promise is that the government can do health better and cheaper than the private sector. I'll put aside for the moment the holes Dr. Helen has punched into this kneejerk reaction to review a few points the Times made.
Like this one:
We rank near the bottom in healthy life expectancy at age 60, and 15th among 19 countries in deaths from a wide range of illnesses that would not have been fatal if treated with timely and effective care. The good news is that we have done a better job than other industrialized nations in reducing smoking. The bad news is that our obesity epidemic is the worst in the world.
If anything this passage argue against turning over health care to the government. Through Medicare, the federal government has a monopoly on the health insurance of Americans 65 and older. And yet "we rank near the bottom in healthy life expectancy at age 60." Tut tut.
But the passage also shows how nonsensical it is to connect health insurance to life expectancy. What in the devil does medical insurance have to do with "our obesity epidemic" being "the worst in the world"? Is the New York Times suggesting, as the head of the British medical association has done, the withholding of certain medications for fat people in an effort to get them to lose weight? Will the government tell us what to eat, when and how much? I find it odd for a newspaper that opposes the military eavesdropping on foreign enemy combatants overseas without a warrant would embrace government-approved menus at home.
Then there is this sentence that really amused me.
American doctors and hospitals kill patients through surgical and medical mistakes more often than their counterparts in other industrialized nations.
And yet, we have the most pro-plaintiff medical malpractice laws in the world. Here I thought all those multi-millionaire liberal lawyers were holding doctors "accountable" with those contingency claims. And yet we're No. 1 in doctors killing patients.
Of course, it could be that by the time an American decides to go to the hospital, he is already too far gone.
Which leads me to Dr. Helen's post. She raises the distinct possibility that other factors are involved: "That's funny, two decades ago without universal healthcare, the article says the US ranked number 11 in life expectancy. So isn't it possible that something else is going on?"
Of course. Race, risk and lifestyle all play a part in it. Japanese women have held the world's title for longest life expectancy for 22 years.
Another factor is who is keeping score. In August 2003, more than 35,000 elderly people died when a heat wave hit Western Europe, including 14,802 elderly people in France. And yet, somehow, this has not affected the French life expectancy score?
Interesting that one factor was French doctors who by law cannot work more than 35 hours in a week.
Have the post office provide my health care? I'll take my chances with what I have now.
There may be an argument for government-run health care; this Times editorial did not make it.
blogs.dailymail.com |
