I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

American Health Care Vs. The World's Prices [Pic]

Hits: 15543 | Rating: (2.9) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: fancylad
Page: 13 4 5 6 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
HolyGod
Male, 30-39, Western US
 5021 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 10:56:51 PM
Davymid

"No-one complains about paying for the fire department, or infrastructure, or the military or whatever via their taxes, do they? (Or maybe they do, correct me if I'm wrong)."

There are people in this country that believe we shouldn't pay taxes at all.

For the most part this is just because it is new. 2 generations from now Americans will consider healthcare the same way we currently consider police and public education. It's just hard to change people.

stell
Female, 40-49, Canada
 64 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 10:55:01 PM
To those Americans who say their treatment wait times are shorter - of course they are, because .. NOT EVERONE GETS TO WAIT IN LINE IN YOUR COUNTRY! I can't believe how brainwashed you Americans are over universal healthcare. You believe every stereotype fed to you by insurance companies scared over losing their huge profits. It's ridiculously expensive in your country because it's done for profit & there is simply no end to human greed, so insurance companies keep raising the cost in order to meet the shareholder's demands for higher profits. It's never going to end. In order to continue to generate higher profits, they will start denying treatments, delay treatment in hopes you'll die... oh wait.. they already do that & you still believe they are right, ha, ha. Brainwashing at its finest! You can judge a society by how it treats its weakest, most vulnerable members - kids, elderly & the sick. Judging by how you treat your sick, your society is going to hell in a handbaske

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12078 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 9:51:09 PM
I've posted this graph a few times over the years, from National Geographic a few years ago.



And the article which google picked up the graphic from America spends way, way, way more on healthcare.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12078 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 9:48:03 PM
Wow. I know I'm late to the party, but the idea that someone could lose their life savings over a life-threatening illness is beyond me. Or worse, possibly die because they can't afford the care they need. That's abhorrent.

Sorry, but this sentiment of "I have no problem with caring for the sick, but I WON'T BE FORCED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO DO SO!" *especially* when it's demonstrably cheaper, comes across as sheer stubborn petulance.

No-one complains about paying for the fire department, or infrastructure, or the military or whatever via their taxes, do they? (Or maybe they do, correct me if I'm wrong).

Why then complain about the most basic of human needs, staying alive? Especially when just about every other functioning developed society has such a system, which works out quite well - no complaints from the people who are paying into it, as far as I can tell.

MountainBord
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
 1898 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 8:37:12 PM
un beeeelievable!

HolyGod
Male, 30-39, Western US
 5021 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 6:47:40 PM
Cajun247

"Sorry that stat doesn't answer my question, out of HOW MANY patients recieve this treatment."

A Journal of Health Affairs study found the AVERAGE cost per cancer case was $70,000 in 1999. For whatever reason that is the most recent data I can find.

I also found data that says cancer costs have doubled.

"In 1987, the total medical cost of cancer (in 2007 American dollars) was $24.7 billion, but by 2001 to 2005, the cost increased by 98%, to $48.1 billion, according to a study published online May 10 in Cancer."

So I'd say it would be pretty easy to assume the AVERAGE cost per cancer case is easily over $100,000, and that is AVERAGE.

Point is, get health insurance, at least catastrophic health insurance. It isn't that much. It takes ONE bad medical break and you are f.ucked.

Listypoos
Male, 30-39, Europe
 2601 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 6:07:30 PM
MrPeabody,
No, there's not an organisation dealing with just that...but we do have specialist hospitals and centres of excellence that would give comparable treatment - if your case warrants it then you get a referral from either your GP or your regular hospital consultant. And it costs nothing extra to be seen by the best in their field.

Just because their isn't an 'organisation' called the same thing as in the US doesn't mean there aren't equally qualified doctors you get referred to here...they may not all be in the same place under one banner - but they are there - all for no extra cost.

I know from experience.... i'm a war pensioner and i'm under the care of a london specialist hospital even though i live 300 miles from there now. When i need to go, they come and pick me up and drive me home again...the same service i'd get whether i was a veteran or not - again, all for no extra cost above my normal national insurance tax.

MrPeabody
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 1795 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 5:05:40 PM
I ran into this quote, and thought it would help the discussion:

"The likelihood that they're on a terminal course is fairly certain, but who knows?" says Dr. Kintner, who is familiar with the Clark case but didn't meet the brothers. "If they were citizens of U.S., we'd try to get them to the National Institute of Health for diagnostic work, but in the UK the system is different. There is no comparable organization with genetic diseases, so it's a little more difficult there."

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10272 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 4:31:38 PM
I should go, I'm just getting tired.

MeGrendel
Male, 40-49, Southern US
 4630 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 4:31:20 PM
Essersmith-" if you do not support universal healthcare, you pretty much dont want to be good to others."

I didn't realize that 'wanting to be good to others' was a requirement to be a member of the human race.

People also have the right to be asswipes. It's totally a personal choice.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10272 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 4:24:44 PM
So I'd say it happens a lot.


Sorry that stat doesn't answer my question, out of HOW MANY patients recieve this treatment.

HolyGod
Male, 30-39, Western US
 5021 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 4:15:16 PM
Cajun247

"How often does this happen?"

"According to Johns Hopkins Health Alerts, addition of Avastin® or Erbitux® to 5-FU or leucovorin can push up the cost of the dosing regimen to as much as $30,000." That is for 8 WEEKS of treatment.

So I'd say it happens a lot.

AntEconomist
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 260 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 4:05:09 PM
@Essersmith

"Im not sure I get it then, the state is not forcing everyone to do so, the people chose through years of democratic (here it is 2/3 of the votes) elections to do so."

If 1/3 of the people vote against public healthcare, then the state violates the freedoms 1/3 of the people when it institutes public healthcare.

Now, practically speaking, if we are going to have a government then we need a mechanism by which a majority can violate the freedoms of the minority. Without this, government is moot. So what is the appropriate definition of "majority?" Too low we violate freedoms wantonly. Too high and we make communal action impossible. The US constitution calls for a 2/3 majority for most things the federal government does. However, for the past century, the practice in the US has been to ignore this and take action on the basis of 50% vote.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10272 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 3:58:18 PM
Someone who is diagnosed with cancer can end up paying hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of treatment. Hell, some of the drugs cost around $100,000 a year.


How often does this happen?

HolyGod
Male, 30-39, Western US
 5021 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 3:53:54 PM
Cajun247

"Highest number I saw was $41134."

Well, then with all due respect you don't have a f.ucking clue what you are talking about. You may want to bow out of this conversation and go do some research.

Someone who is diagnosed with cancer can end up paying hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of treatment. Hell, some of the drugs cost around $100,000 a year.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10272 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 3:33:23 PM
We had to take care of her at home, still on a respirator. Then about a month later, her heart started beating out of control. Ambulance to the ER. Died a day later in intensive care. How much do you think THAT cost?


As tragic your loss may be, that is, unfortunately purely anecdotal.

shaustin
Male, 18-29, Canada
 143 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 3:28:45 PM
lol well those american doctors have to do something to keep themselves in the top 1%... this is what happens when a country keeps there medical system completely separate from their government. Doctors rake in cash, insurance companies rake in cash, and the general population gets fuuuuuucked

oh and then the right wing comes and tells you that you're not being drated and everything is fine and should stay exactly the way it is

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 3:28:07 PM
"Highest number I saw was $41134."

lol. what, no cents? You've got it alllll figured out. Did you figure in the fact that once you get cancer, it often comes back? My mom got cancer and it came back two more times. The third time, she ended up needing a respirator to breathe. Spent a few months in one hospital, a few more in another trying to get off the respirator. Then another year in a respiratory rehab facility. Insurance finally ran out. We had to take care of her at home, still on a respirator. Then about a month later, her heart started beating out of control. Ambulance to the ER. Died a day later in intensive care. How much do you think THAT cost?

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10272 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 3:15:40 PM
you could be looking at over $100,000 in costs


Highest number I saw was $41134.

HolyGod
Male, 30-39, Western US
 5021 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 3:01:39 PM
Cajun247

"That's why I'd prefer to keep the money myself."

So you don't have health insurance? If you ever get cancer or diagnosed with some other illness you could be looking at over $100,000 in costs. You'd be buried in debt for probably the rest of your life. You, like a lot of people in this country, are one illness away from financial ruin.

I don't wish that on anyone.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10272 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 2:59:44 PM
The idea of someone, by themself, saving money in the event of a calamity is nothing new. Yes there ARE times it does make sense to go through a third party to insure against risk. But sometimes the markets, by and large, charge too much.

Essersmith
Male, 18-29, Europe
 273 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 2:57:23 PM
@Cajun247

Thats a great opinion. I hope you have the means to back it and not a bitter taste in your mouth when you need it.

SuperN00B
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 207 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 2:51:58 PM
Don't worry, Obama Care will take care of this. Just like Obama has taken care of the debt, the economy, unemployment and everything else Bush and the Republicans have screwed up.

P.S. Sarcasm alert.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10272 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 2:48:45 PM
Look at all the people on the east coast who live near the water and decided they didn't want to pay for flood insurance


A dumb decision by many measures, which is why home insurers don't insure people living near flood waters.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10272 Posts
Sunday, December 02, 2012 2:46:51 PM
Its pretty pointless to look at chances here...


Ah but that's where I see an alternative. I simply see most health insurers as a woefully inefficient means of insuring against a risk so small. That's why I'd prefer to keep the money myself.

Page: 13 4 5 6 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.