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.

MrDwhitey wrote:Yup, sadly the NHS has been awesome for me, so no issues.

Chowderhead wrote:It's too late, Shotty.

No, I think not. I just don't know how to change the damn icon.

Well , have you got any medical illness that needs expensive treatment ? im sure its ok to get cream or whatever but what about the medecin thet costs alot of money and that saves lives ?

ShumaGorath wrote:
Oh, my bad. I guess I've never seen people present heat related mortality as some sort of state healthcare issue. Generally presented as a natural disaster related issue in the context of heatwaves. Next time I'll read your posts more carefully lest they not make any sense, like now.

Its also worth noting that 2003 was a pretty warm year in Europe and particularly so in North of France which, as per wikipedia, is not well equipped to deal with heat waves of this nature for reasons beyond the healthcare system.

Goddard wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Goddard wrote:Let's all take a step back, and think about what we're posting. Debate, but do so politely.

You're not likely to find a debate here.

Then lets not have an argument instead.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

o0shotty0o wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:Yup, sadly the NHS has been awesome for me, so no issues.

Chowderhead wrote:It's too late, Shotty.

No, I think not. I just don't know how to change the damn icon.

Well , have you got any medical illness that needs expensive treatment ? im sure its ok to get cream or whatever but what about the medecin thet costs alot of money and that saves lives ?

Yes. I have Ulcerative Colitis, and need to take Asacol to control it. It's 150 dollars a bottle, but thanks to health insurance, I get it for 10. Without it, I would need to have my colon removed.

o0shotty0o wrote:No i watched a documetary called sicko , he shows footage of someone dieing outside a hospital becaus he couldent show that he had any insurance or money.

I saw a documentary once, it said that the French were a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys... I also read the Complete Military History of France once, it said that France sucks in warfare:

Gallic Wars: Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

Hundred Years War: Mostly lost, saved at last by a female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare - "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchmen."

Italian Wars: Lost. France becomes the first and only country ever to lose two wars when fighting Italians.

Wars of Religion: France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots.

Thirty Years' War: France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

War of Devolution: Tied; Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

The Dutch War: Tied.

War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War: Lost, but claimed as a tie. Deluded Frogophiles the world over label the period as the height of French Military Power.

War of the Spanish Succession: Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved ever since.

American Revolution: In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of the fighting".

French Revolution: Won, primarily due to the fact that the opponent was also French.

The Napoleonic Wars: Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

The Franco-Prussian War: Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

WWI: Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like not only to sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

WWII: Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

War in Indochina: Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with Dien Bien Flu.

Algerian Rebellion: Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a Western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare -"We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Eskimos.

War on Terrorism: France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe.

Clearly because I saw a documentary and read this on the internet, it must be true.

I can't say from experience, but I would wager that Singapore has an excellent healthcare system, certainly one of the best in the world, based on what I have read/heard.

chaos0xomega wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:No i watched a documetary called sicko , he shows footage of someone dieing outside a hospital becaus he couldent show that he had any insurance or money.

I saw a documentary once, it said that the French were a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys... I also read the Complete Military History of France once, it said that France sucks in warfare:

Gallic Wars: Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

Hundred Years War: Mostly lost, saved at last by a female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare - "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchmen."

Italian Wars: Lost. France becomes the first and only country ever to lose two wars when fighting Italians.

Wars of Religion: France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots.

Thirty Years' War: France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

War of Devolution: Tied; Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

The Dutch War: Tied.

War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War: Lost, but claimed as a tie. Deluded Frogophiles the world over label the period as the height of French Military Power.

War of the Spanish Succession: Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved ever since.

American Revolution: In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of the fighting".

French Revolution: Won, primarily due to the fact that the opponent was also French.

The Napoleonic Wars: Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

The Franco-Prussian War: Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

WWI: Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like not only to sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

WWII: Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

War in Indochina: Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with Dien Bien Flu.

Algerian Rebellion: Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a Western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare -"We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Eskimos.

War on Terrorism: France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe.

Clearly because I saw a documentary and read this on the internet, it must be true.

171000 cancer deaths in 2010 in France.

1,529,560 new cancer cases and 569,490 deaths from cancer in 2010 in america.

But anyway stop making me talk about america !!

The pictures in that link are awesome, Chowder.

Shotty, I have two conditions of which I will keep to myself thanks. I also have Asthma, which I don't mind admitting because it lets me laugh like Mutley. Which is fething awesome.

All I'm saying is the conditions suffered by me and my parents have been dealt with well by the NHS, so I have not suffered the experience that you claim to have. I do however know that refusals for treatment due to costs do happen.

I don't really know anymore so I cannot give a proper discussion in any sense, really.

o0shotty0o wrote:
171000 cancer deaths in 2010 in France.

1,529,560 new cancer cases and 569,490 deaths from cancer in 2010 in america.

But anyway stop making me talk about america !!

Once again, Math it up.

1 out of 36 people in france died from Cancer.

1 in 539 people died from cancer in the US.


Come on people! Do some fething math!

MrDwhitey wrote:The pictures in that link are awesome, Chowder.

Shotty, I have two conditions of which I will keep to myself thanks. I also have Asthma, which I don't mind admitting because it lets me laugh like Mutley. Which is fething awesome.

All I'm saying is the conditions suffered by me and my parents have been dealt with well by the NHS, so I have not suffered the experience that you claim to have. I do however know that refusals for treatment due to costs do happen.

I don't really know anymore so I cannot give a proper discussion in any sense, really.

Ok thanks for that imput , MrDwhitey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO's_ranking_of_health_care_systems

Well, pretty much objectively speaking, the best country for overall quality of healthcare is France. They pay for it, though, with 11.2% of GDP going towards healthcare expenditure in France. In terms of bang for your buck, the best places for healthcare in the world is Cuba (118th most spend per capita, 39th best system), and Oman (8th best system in the world, but only 62nd in spending). But there's other really big reasons not to live in those countries.

Among countries that'd actually be classed as okay places to live, Spain is probably giving you your best bang for your dollar, with the 7th best system in the world, but only the 24th most spending per capita.

In case you're wondering but don't want to click on the link, the US came in with the 37th best quality. This is particularly damning when you consider the US spent more than 17% of GDP on healthcare, making it not only the biggest spender in the world, but the biggest spender by about 50% over France. Switzerland and Germany don't fair much better, coming in second and third in total spending, but delivering healthcare quality at 20th and 25th in the world, respectively.

CptJake wrote:Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

That's ridiculous. Deaths to heat in France were the product of an unusually hot summer, in a country that doesn't build housing to prevent the heat, because the heat is not normally that much of an issue. It is not a product of the healthcare system.

You measure healthcare on infant mortality, life expectancy, waiting times, hospital error rates, hospital infection rates, all these kinds of things.

You will never get anywhere inventing silly reasons to ignore the possibility that something might be done better elsewhere in the world. The way to improve your society is to look at what is done well elsewhere in the world, and see if you can adapt their system into your own.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

o0shotty0o wrote:Lol what has that got to do with healthcare?

Massachusetts reformed its healthcare system in 2006, to ensure universal coverage. This model served as the basis for Obama's healthcare reform.

The politics of it are hilarious, because the Republican who instituted that system, Mitt Romney, is currently a favourite for the Republican Presidential election. That healthcare reform is the sole reason he's politically relevant, but the Republicans hate Obamacare, so Romney is forced to basically run against his own legacy. So far the best solution he's come up with is 'state's rights'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

14,000 times five is smaller than 600,000. Get out your calculator and check it if you want.

Once you've done that, stop inventing stupid reasons for pretending the US healthcare system is an okay system. It is by far the most expensive system in the world, and you get a mediocre return at best. If you have the French system, you'd save $840 billion a year, and life expectancy would increase by two years. You're paying $840 billion more per year, to die sooner.

Sebster wins this thread hands down i think.

I kind of wonder if the amount of fat people we have in the US skews our numbers at all.

I'd rather live in a country with proper air conditioning, truth be told. Hell, it doesn't even have to be the USA, as much as I love it.

Monster Rain wrote:I'd rather live in a country with proper air conditioning, truth be told. Hell, it doesn't even have to be the USA, as much as I love it.

I m sure thats what people say just before thay have a heart attack.

How exactly is France's healthcare system structured, etc? I'd be interested to know how they are able to pay less than the US does and still deliver a better system.

My money is, seriously, on less fatties and better diets. I have to wonder how much of America's medical expenses are related to obesity issues, which could range from cardiovascular disease to diabetes.

o0shotty0o wrote:I m sure thats what people say just before thay have a heart attack.

That doesn't make sense.

Maybe during a heart attack they wouldn't be so concerned about it, but before? They'd probably say any number of things. Despite the fact that the USA, according to some, has the medical equivalent of witch doctors and leeches I'm confident that were I to have a heart attack I could call 911 and an ambulance would come and take me to a hospital where doctors would do doctorly things.

Monster Rain wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:I m sure thats what people say just before thay have a heart attack.

That doesn't make sense.

Maybe during a heart attack they wouldn't be so concerned about it, but before? They'd probably say any number of things.

"I think I'll have the steak."

MrDwhitey wrote:"I think I'll have the steak."

"This milkshake is delicious. Pass me another slice of that there pie, would you Darlene?"

....now I'm hungry. Thanks a lot. :(


Bacon Cheeseburger, here I come!

sebster wrote:You will never get anywhere inventing silly reasons to ignore the possibility that something might be done better elsewhere in the world.

Other than the highest political office in the land, you mean.

sebster wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO's_ranking_of_health_care_systems

Well, pretty much objectively speaking, the best country for overall quality of healthcare is France. They pay for it, though, with 11.2% of GDP going towards healthcare expenditure in France. In terms of bang for your buck, the best places for healthcare in the world is Cuba (118th most spend per capita, 39th best system), and Oman (8th best system in the world, but only 62nd in spending). But there's other really big reasons not to live in those countries.

Among countries that'd actually be classed as okay places to live, Spain is probably giving you your best bang for your dollar, with the 7th best system in the world, but only the 24th most spending per capita.

In case you're wondering but don't want to click on the link, the US came in with the 37th best quality. This is particularly damning when you consider the US spent more than 17% of GDP on healthcare, making it not only the biggest spender in the world, but the biggest spender by about 50% over France. Switzerland and Germany don't fair much better, coming in second and third in total spending, but delivering healthcare quality at 20th and 25th in the world, respectively.

CptJake wrote:Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

That's ridiculous. Deaths to heat in France were the product of an unusually hot summer, in a country that doesn't build housing to prevent the heat, because the heat is not normally that much of an issue. It is not a product of the healthcare system.

You measure healthcare on infant mortality, life expectancy, waiting times, hospital error rates, hospital infection rates, all these kinds of things.

You will never get anywhere inventing silly reasons to ignore the possibility that something might be done better elsewhere in the world. The way to improve your society is to look at what is done well elsewhere in the world, and see if you can adapt their system into your own.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

o0shotty0o wrote:Lol what has that got to do with healthcare?

Massachusetts reformed its healthcare system in 2006, to ensure universal coverage. This model served as the basis for Obama's healthcare reform.

The politics of it are hilarious, because the Republican who instituted that system, Mitt Romney, is currently a favourite for the Republican Presidential election. That healthcare reform is the sole reason he's politically relevant, but the Republicans hate Obamacare, so Romney is forced to basically run against his own legacy. So far the best solution he's come up with is 'state's rights'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

14,000 times five is smaller than 600,000. Get out your calculator and check it if you want.

Once you've done that, stop inventing stupid reasons for pretending the US healthcare system is an okay system. It is by far the most expensive system in the world, and you get a mediocre return at best. If you have the French system, you'd save $840 billion a year, and life expectancy would increase by two years. You're paying $840 billion more per year, to die sooner.

Funny, I don't ever recall of mentioning that the US system is an okay system.

So whats the deal with high fructose corn syrup? Sort of off topic I know but doesn't France outright ban the crap? Maybe we should follow suit.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012601831.html

Are people really going to try to discuss things with this guy after the last thread?

oh dear, so many opinions, such little knowledge.

The US has the greatest healthcare IF you have money. If you don't it sucks. No-one can argue with this. Last time I looked US ranks 17th in WHO tables but that was a while again. Those tables are on percentages of people treated.

This cannot be argued with.

Technology and treatment wise the US is the best. That is fact. The number of people treated to the same level of skill we totally suck at.

Sasori wrote:Are people really going to try to discuss things with this guy after the last thread?

I'm surprised he hasn't been banhammered yet, it's kind of embarrassing to see the mods allow someone with such offensive posting history to still continue.

fullheadofhair wrote:
Technology and treatment wise the US is the best. That is fact.

Is it?

Many statistics seem to contravene this fact. I mean, I guess you might measure technology by "number of MRI machines" or "number of super machine X", but treatment really can only be measured by results. If its simply measured by "treatment" then hitting every sick person with a baseball bat till their retinas detach would allow us to reach 100% treatment.

I guess you may have meant that any curable illness you may have can be cured if you have enough money, but that's true of basically any Western nation. When discussing medical systems the points of contention always revolve around mass considerations.

dogma wrote:

fullheadofhair wrote:
Technology and treatment wise the US is the best. That is fact.

Is it?

Many statistics seem to contravene this fact. I mean, I guess you might measure technology by "number of MRI machines" or "number of super machine X", but treatment really can only be measured by results. If its simply measured by "treatment" then hitting every sick person with a baseball bat till their retinas detach would allow us to reach 100% treatment.

I guess you may have meant that any curable illness you may have can be cured if you have enough money, but that's true of basically any Western nation. When discussing medical systems the points of contention always revolve around mass considerations.

No, you missed my point but then made the point I was making. What I am saying is on a pure technology advancement and the discovery of new treatment basis the US leads leads the world. My wife works in radiology and what they are doing is nothing short of amazing. However, when it comes to treating the largest number of people in a fair and equitable manner the US sucks. I think if you don't have health insurance your death rate increase by 25% if you have an illness or accident that requires you to go to a hospital - a stat I remember from a US newspaper during Obamacare "debate".

o0shotty0o wrote:Oh my .... thats alot of people.Ok lets stay on subject though i dident create this thread to talk only about america.Any other brits out there ?

Yeah, we're here. We're just ashamed of you.