Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The OT forum has become a breeding ground for the DURR, and a bit of hurr here and there as well.

As our heads roll around, we chase them in despair... balloon brain, perhaps exasperated noggin'. The diagnosis is unclear but the remedy has already taken form .

halonachos wrote:I will say this, what's the last contribution a european person has given to medical science?

We have the artificial heart, use of anesthesia, and invention of MRIs.

Another reason why it costs more over here is that american hospitals have more MRI, CAT scan, and other equipment than their european counterparts and we have more access to tests using these.

Do we pay more, yes but we also have more.

Wikipedia:

Reflecting the fundamental importance and applicability of MRI in the medical field, Paul Lauterbur of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Sir Peter Mansfield of the University of Nottingham were awarded the 2003 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their "discoveries concerning magnetic resonance imaging".

CAT scanning was invented by Thorn EMI, in England.

So there.

Kilkrazy wrote:CAT scanning was invented by Thorn EMI, in England.

So there.

sebster wrote:

halonachos wrote:I will say this, what's the last contribution a european person has given to medical science?

We have the artificial heart, use of anesthesia, and invention of MRIs.

Another reason why it costs more over here is that american hospitals have more MRI, CAT scan, and other equipment than their european counterparts and we have more access to tests using these.

2008 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Harald zur Hausen (German), Francoise Barre Sinoussi (French) and Luc Montagnier (French)
2007 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Mario R. Capecchi (Italian), Martin J Evans (UK), Oliver Smithies (UK)
2006 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Andrew Z Fire (US) and Craig C Mello (US)
2005 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Barry Marshall (Australian) and J Robin Warren (Australian)
2004 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Richard Axel (US) and Linda B Buck (US)
2003 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Paul C Lauterbur (US) and Peter Mansfield (UK)
2002 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Sydney Brenner (South African), H Robert Horvitz (US), John E Sulston (UK)
2001 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Leland H Hartwell (US), R Timothy Hunt (UK) and Paul M Nurse (UK)
2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Arvid Carlsson (Sweden), Paul Greengard (US) and Eric Kandel (Austrian)
1999 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Gunter Blobel (German).

So that's ten years of Nobel prizes, awarded to a total of 24 people. Of those 24 people you have 8 from the US, 13 from Europe and and 3 from elsewhere in the world. Your assertion that no medical advancements occur outside of the US is utterly false.

Do we pay more, yes but we also have more.

No. You have less. In terms of quality of healthcare you are ranked 37th, behind Slovenia. You are paying 50% more than anyone for the 37th best healthcare. If I walked into a car dealer and he showed me a car that cost 50% more than anything else on the market and declared this is the 37th best car around, I would not buy that car.

That'd be impressive until we realize Al Gore and Arafat the killer of women and babies also received Nobel prizes...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:
CAT scanning was invented by Thorn EMI, in England.

So there.

How come now one ever credit's the cats with these advances? I never knew cats had such powers...



Of course due to the requirements of the new Fairness Doctrine, now a rebuttal from the canine front

Frazzled wrote:That'd be impressive until we realize Al Gore and Arafat the killer of women and babies also received Nobel prizes...

That would be damning if the Nobel committee for Medicine was the same as the committee for the peace prize. Given they're different people working with different criteria deciding an award for a completely different field of achievement, it's irrelevant.

But yeah, the Nobel Peace prize is generally an odd one.

Its not irrelevant at all. It allows me to make fun of the Nobel association and insert random images.

I think we've all learned soemthing today.

sebster wrote:[2008 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Harald zur Hausen (German), Francoise Barre Sinoussi (French) and Luc Montagnier (French)
2007 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Mario R. Capecchi (Italian), Martin J Evans (UK), Oliver Smithies (UK)
2006 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Andrew Z Fire (US) and Craig C Mello (US)
2005 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Barry Marshall (Australian) and J Robin Warren (Australian)
2004 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Richard Axel (US) and Linda B Buck (US)
2003 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Paul C Lauterbur (US) and Peter Mansfield (UK)
2002 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Sydney Brenner (South African), H Robert Horvitz (US), John E Sulston (UK)
2001 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Leland H Hartwell (US), R Timothy Hunt (UK) and Paul M Nurse (UK)
2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Arvid Carlsson (Sweden), Paul Greengard (US) and Eric Kandel (Austrian)
1999 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Gunter Blobel (German).

But let us look not at the number of americans, but the number of prizes given to teams involving americans.
I see 4 teams that had an american's aid.(He probably did all of the work because he could afford the test tubes).
And two teams of only americans while only 1 all australian team and 1 all german team got prizes.
So 60% of those prizes were attributed to teams of americans or who had americans in them.

Also, seeing as though "europe" is not a country and the USA is, we have to be fair and look at the number of prizes to country.
UK winners-6
German winners-2
Italian winners-1
French winners-2
Austrian winners-1
Swedish winners-1
S. African winners-1
American winners-8

USA, USA, USA.
Also, snaeporue have had some time with chemical research and stuff, like mustard gas and other killy stuff.

halonachos wrote:
But let us look not at the number of americans, but the number of prizes given to teams involving americans.
I see 4 teams that had an american's aid.(He probably did all of the work because he could afford the test tubes).
And two teams of only americans while only 1 all australian team and 1 all german team got prizes.
So 60% of those prizes were attributed to teams of americans or who had americans in them.

And 70% of the prizes were awarded to teams of Europeans, or teams with Europeans in them.

halonachos wrote:
Also, seeing as though "europe" is not a country and the USA is, we have to be fair and look at the number of prizes to country.
UK winners-6
German winners-2
Italian winners-1
French winners-2
Austrian winners-1
Swedish winners-1
S. African winners-1
American winners-8

You could then assess the number of winners per capita, and...

UK ~ 1 per 10 million
Germany ~ 1 per 40 million
Italy ~ 1 per 60 million
France ~ 1 per 12 million
Austria ~ 1 per 1 per 8 million
Sweden ~ 1 per 9 million
SA ~ 1 per 50 million
America ~ 1 per 37 million

As the saying goes if a toothpick can be dressed up like a tomato... IT IS A DAMN TOMATO NOW... c'mon people, really?

Very very impressive break-down... kinda like Glenn Beck MB? Kinda? Sorta? Yeah... a bit...

Halitosis wrote:Also, seeing as though "europe" is not a country and the USA is, we have to be fair and look at the number of prizes to country.

Yep... erm... yeah, yep...

I fail to see how that is all that relevant when you take into account the size of the U.S... and realize that one on one we beat nearly every country in the E.U... can you imagine that being possible? Could this be part of the reason that they FORMED the E.U.???

Maybe... kinda. sorta... yeah, just a bit.

It is an argument like:
Well since my car is made in the U.S. it is better... in which you are usually mistaken, and clearly so, in most cases.

Dogma wrote:And 70% of the prizes were awarded to teams of Europeans, or teams with Europeans in them.

GODDAMIT DOGMA... it is a Tomato, would you just play along already?

Austria ~ 1 per 1 per 8 million... So cool they have two one pers!!!

GO AUSTRIA!!! WOOT!!!



Umm... no I am not all that hungry Austria... thank you though?

Seriously though... that looks fan-freaking-tastic... all I need now is...



Austria... you are *tears up*... seriously freaking awesome .

Doesn't matter, if you can count the E.U as one country then I demand Canada, Mexico, and the U.S then count as one country. Although that does mean we have a handicap.

halonachos wrote:Doesn't matter, if you can count the E.U as one country then I demand Canada, Mexico, and the U.S then count as one country. Although that does mean we have a handicap.

Huh? The European Union is an actual governing body. Canada, Mexico, and the US are...Canada, Mexico, and the US.

I demand the A.U be founded then! Captain Obama make it so!

Captain Halanchos to some sort of twisted abstract self-fulfilling rescue?

Sure... I guess.

halonachos wrote:Also, seeing as though "europe" is not a country and the USA is, we have to be fair and look at the number of prizes to country.
UK winners-6
German winners-2
Italian winners-1
French winners-2
Austrian winners-1
Swedish winners-1
S. African winners-1
American winners-8

You left Australia out of your count above.

Your claim was that all medical breakthroughs were from the US. Now you’re claiming that the US has had more Nobel winners in medicine that other countries, and pretending your original point still holds. Man up, take the hit and concede your original claim. Not all medical breakthroughs are US breakthroughs.

Then try to explain how the US’ dominance in medical research results in it producing so many less Nobel prize winners per capita, as per Dogma’s work. And that’s just per capita, if you wanted to compare it to Nobel winners per dollar spent on healthcare it starts getting really ugly.

For instance, the US spends 16% of it’s GDP of $14 trillion on healthcare, or $2.2 trillion. So for the $2.2 trillion you spend on healthcare, the amount funnelled into research is producing just 8 people responsible for Nobel prize winning breakthroughs – that’s $280 billion for each breakthrough.

Meanwhile the UK, with it’s horrible, horrible socialist scheme, is spending 8% of its GDP of $2.2 trillion on healthcare, or $176 billion. With that it produced 6 Nobel prize winners, or one per $30 billion.

Dude, seriously, if you don’t want to keep getting your ass kicked, you have to stop defending US healthcare. It is a losing cause, because US healthcare is as dysfunctional as it gets in the developed world.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:You could then assess the number of winners per capita, and...

UK ~ 1 per 10 million
Germany ~ 1 per 40 million
Italy ~ 1 per 60 million
France ~ 1 per 12 million
Austria ~ 1 per 1 per 8 million
Sweden ~ 1 per 9 million
SA ~ 1 per 50 million
America ~ 1 per 37 million

There's only 8 million people in Austria. Huh. I would have thought it was like double that.

Adding some fuel to the above post; its worth mentioning that the USA attracts medical students worldwide and I'm assuming on a larger scale than any of the other countries; many graduates find themselves going back to their own countries with such knowledge.

Not that its a bad thing but just wanted to add fuel to the AMERICA feth YEA type of discussion going on

halonachos wrote:I will say this, what's the last contribution a european person has given to medical science?

We have the artificial heart, use of anesthesia, and invention of MRIs.

Another reason why it costs more over here is that american hospitals have more MRI, CAT scan, and other equipment than their european counterparts and we have more access to tests using these.

Do we pay more, yes but we also have more.

I have no idea who the hell you're hitting seeing as though in my quote above, I haven't said ANYTHING about ALL medical breakthroughs coming from only america.

Perhaps its just some weird translation from american english to australian english in terms of slang.

Also, that's just 10 years. Lets look at history of the nobel.

UK-31
Germany-21
France-11
Australia-6
Sweden-6
Austria-7
Italy-6
S Africa-3
And America with a whopping 93 winners.

That's just medicine/physiology.

Total:
UK-113
Australia-9
Austria-19
Italy-20
Germany-102
France-57
Sweden-28
S.Africa-3

And America-309.

Sorry mate, you lose.

Next time, actually read what I write and try not to make me say things I didn't.

I will start with this one right here... and I will state again that you arguing from a false perspective. If I am not mistaken at least a few of our Nobel champions have been immigrants, and in one form or another most peoples family are from abroad anyway... and I grew up in the city of Berkeley, CA surrounded by people from across the planet, most of which were not U.S. citizens by birth-right, although some were. And so on and so forth.

http://nobelprize.org/

Now we look into this right here in the place that says the stuff about what you are trying to say.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/

Now to here, with the most recent set of prizes... none from the U.S. and we all know how much you would love that though!

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2008/index.html

halonachos wrote:I have no idea who the hell you're hitting seeing as though in my quote above, I haven't said ANYTHING about ALL medical breakthroughs coming from only america.

You said this;

“I will say this, what's the last contribution a european person has given to medical science?”

You later went on to say;
“If your latest discovery is penicillin (which a large number are allergic to and has been mainly replaced) then you are a backwards nation.”

You questioned the last time a European country contributed anything to medicine. You then went on to assume they'd contributed nothing since penicillin. I pointed out that in the last ten years more Europeans had been recognised than Americans by the Nobel committee for their contributions to medical research.

Also, that's just 10 years. Lets look at history of the nobel.

UK-31
Germany-21
France-11
Australia-6
Sweden-6
Austria-7
Italy-6
S Africa-3
And America with a whopping 93 winners.

That's just medicine/physiology.

Yeah, if you want to make the claim that the US led the world utterly in medical research in 1925 you’d be right. If this was about a choice between the medical systems of the US and Europe in 1925, I think we’d all pick the US.

But times have moved on, and many countries have advanced their medical systems, so much so that comparisons to effectiveness from 50 years ago are absurd, in many ways comparisons to 20 years ago are dubious. That’s why I chose the last ten years.

So while you may be happy that your system is great because it used to produce more Nobel winners 50 years ago, the rest of us are going to consider how good your system is right now. The rest of us would consider the winner of the 1936 Nobel prize irrelevant in assessing the value of the US medical system today. We might even consider the historic dominance of the US an argument against the current system, that while the US used to produce so many more Nobel winners the fact that they produce so many less now indicates your system has not kept up with the rest of the world.

Total:
UK-113
Australia-9
Austria-19
Italy-20
Germany-102
France-57
Sweden-28
S.Africa-3

And America-309.

Sorry mate, you lose.

Hang on, so to establish your point that the cost of US healthcare is justified by the amount of research, you’re citing the total number of Nobel winners across all fields. So Al Gore winning the Peace prize increases the justification for the $2.2 trillion you spend on healthcare each year? Are you really making that claim? It is very stupid.

Are you actually thinking about what you’re posting, what you’re trying to establish before you post? Or is this just stimulus and response from you?

Next time, actually read what I write and try not to make me say things I didn't.

But you did say it.

sebster wrote:
There's only 8 million people in Austria. Huh. I would have thought it was like double that.

Yeah, I was surprised too. Though maybe I shouldn't have been, given how mountainous it is.

I'm surprised Germany has over three times the population of France.

Wait... I have found serious debate on this... GO LARRY KING!!! Chikka chikka bow-wow.







And a very nice summary... fitting actually, sort of like a tutu on a pig... wait, my metaphor was a toothpick and a tomato... erm...

Oops, good catch. France should be ~ 1 in 30 million. I had originally included Australia, and then decided to pull them out of the list since they aren't European. Must have done funky editing.

Ah, that makes more sense.

sebster wrote:

halonachos wrote:I will say this, what's the last contribution a european person has given to medical science?

We have the artificial heart, use of anesthesia, and invention of MRIs.

Another reason why it costs more over here is that american hospitals have more MRI, CAT scan, and other equipment than their european counterparts and we have more access to tests using these.

2008 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Harald zur Hausen (German), Francoise Barre Sinoussi (French) and Luc Montagnier (French)
2007 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Mario R. Capecchi (Italian), Martin J Evans (UK), Oliver Smithies (UK)
2006 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Andrew Z Fire (US) and Craig C Mello (US)
2005 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Barry Marshall (Australian) and J Robin Warren (Australian)
2004 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Richard Axel (US) and Linda B Buck (US)
2003 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Paul C Lauterbur (US) and Peter Mansfield (UK)
2002 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Sydney Brenner (South African), H Robert Horvitz (US), John E Sulston (UK)
2001 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Leland H Hartwell (US), R Timothy Hunt (UK) and Paul M Nurse (UK)
2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Arvid Carlsson (Sweden), Paul Greengard (US) and Eric Kandel (Austrian)
1999 Nobel Prize for Medicine, given to Gunter Blobel (German).

Interesting. How many of the Europeans who won work for private hospitals? How many are academics and outside the Government run systems of their home country? The desire for profit can motivate the money behind the research more than the supposed altruistic motives of a state run health care system. I'm curious if anybody knows.

Is there some sort of underground cycle that the public isn't aware of? Get away from me truther... So we have a totally spineless president right now from the looks of it... I wonder if Korea is looking at us right now...

I am honestly becoming ashamed to be a U.S. citizen at this point, I am just thankful that I am not democratic or republican... or anarchist for that matter.

darthdiggler wrote:
Interesting. How many of the Europeans who won work for private hospitals? How many are academics and outside the Government run systems of their home country? The desire for profit can motivate the money behind the research more than the supposed altruistic motives of a state run health care system. I'm curious if anybody knows.

Most medical research is done at university hospitals, and specialized institutions. These are almost always non-profit, and so money is rarely an issue. The pressing matter is funding, which almost always come from outside sources (either the government, or drug companies).

Dogma... what do you think?

Will this reform do anything besides make us more broke? From the looks of it we are going to get a macaroni art version of single-payer.

A single-payer system is unlikely to pass, and for good reason. It won't actually fix the fundamental problems in our current system, and will most likely make them much worse. Imagine cost-plus contracts being issued to insurance companies.

However, if it is defeated that defeat will characterize any talk of healthcare reform for years to come. Unless, in a rare moment of fortitude, the Democrats continue to push the healthcare issue by introducing an entirely different bill based on a completely different system. Essentially debate by force of will.

Let me say that I really hope this is what happens. It would affirm the Administration's promise to keep debate open, get us a better bill, and actually show that there are some politicians with backbone in this damned nation.

How can I go about getting that to happen?

Protesting doesn't seem to make a difference, e-mails (even en masse) don't seem to make a difference....

I am quite sure that my vote is worth absolutely nothing at this point. This in itself is not the worst place to be, but in all honesty it makes me worry for the nations future. I would like to see action taken, and I would even run around cracking jokes at rallies if it would make a real difference... that plus spamming youtube could actually... hmmm.

I have a plan, and it involves Dave Chappelle, who I would have voted for knowing full well that he would have turned it down in his good graces.

WOOT! MY VOTE MEANT SOMETHING TO ME! Anyway, what we do is go to all the town-hall meetings and just counter all republican debating points with simple jest and rhetoric... this idea has to have seriously passed through at least a dozen comedians heads. I think this would work wonders... and yes I am totally insane enough to see something like this through.

Its tricky, because you want to make it clear that this bill is crap, while also communicating a desire to see the debate continue. One way would be to get in touch with the various grassroots networks established during the campaign, and pitch an idea for a pro-healthcare reform rally after the current bill fails. Another might be to simply draw up a protest slogan that somehow encapsulates both those points. But the simplest way of going about this is to talk to people about the bill, and get them to mail their Congressman with something to the affect of what we're discussing.