Covid19 vs Pneumonia

Between Feb. 1 and May 9, 2020

60,299 people have died of Covid19

and

81,318 have died of pneumonia

National Center for Health Statistics, CDC

Misreporting, not reporting, and fudging the Corona virus statistics

That's interesting. There were 13,276 diagnosed Covid19 cases in Ohio by April 22. "Not everyone who is diagnosed is being admitted to the hospital, about 25 percent are." Stephen Markovich, President and CEO, Ohio Health, "Caretaker in Chief," Columbus CEO, May 2020, pp. 8-13. When you hear the number of cases reported on the news or on social media, have you ever heard that? 75% don't get admitted?

We have four enormous hospital systems in Columbus: Ohio Health, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Mount Carmel Health System and Nationwide Children's Hospital. In March the CEOs of these behemoths were even considering turning our Greater Columbus Convention Center into a field hospital. That was the size of the panic, fear and inaccurate models. But as of yesterday during the entire pandemic there have been less than 3,000 confirmed cases in this county (the majority of which didn't required hospitalization), and only about 3,800 hospitalized in the entire state! We're a state of 11.75 million with a number of major cities.

Why are we judging the entire country and its needs by what happened in the New York metropolitan area with a Democrat governor who kept inviting people to come and ignore the fear even on March 2? There was an Italian film playing at Lincoln Center. He urged people to see it. In a month NYC was the epicenter of the pandemic and the rest of us have had to suffer from his carelessness.

Optimism about Covid-19

Want some good (or at least better) news? If your liberal friends deny it, the author is probably on the right track.

"First, the rate of increase in deaths from COVID-19 is decreasing, in the United States and in most countries. That means there is a slowing of deaths, not just the calculated mortality rate, a different statistic that will keep decreasing as we unveil a larger number of people carrying the virus with mild or no symptoms. In the United States as well as in Italy, Spain and other countries most heavily impacted, there is a significant slowing in added deaths. This is evidence that isolation policies are working."

And second. . .

And third . . .

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/490582-the-case-for-optimism?

Michael Smith adds some perspective to death statistics

"I'm not trying to minimize the deaths from the Coronavirus pandemic but when I heard a report yesterday that now in New York, one person dies every 17 minutes due to the disease and that it could get to one person every 9 minutes.

So I checked to see if I could find comparable numbers anywhere on the CDC's website and here's what I found:

Mortality reason #1:
Number of deaths: 36,338
Deaths per 100,000 population: 11.2
Death rate - 1 person per every 15 minutes - comparable to the current mortality frequency of the pandemic in New York.

Mortality reason #2:
Number of deaths: 64,795
Deaths per 100,000 population: 19.9
Death rate: 1 person every 8 minutes - comparable to the predicted mortality frequency of the pandemic in New York.

Mortality reason #1 - unintentional falls.
Mortality reason #2 - unintentional poisonings.

One might think the moral panic is being stoked by the way this pandemic is being promoted in the media.

I don't know how to get people to look at this pandemic with any sense of proportionality - there's just too much fear out there that blocks any sense of rationality."

Life expectancy dropping since 2014

Our behavior is showing up in our health statistics as well as our homes.

"Between 1959 and 2016, US life expectancy increased from 69.9 years to 78.9 years but declined for 3 consecutive years after 2014. The recent decrease in US life expectancy culminated a period of increasing cause-specific mortality among adults aged 25 to 64 years that began in the 1990s, ultimately producing an increase in all-cause mortality that began in 2010. During 2010-2017, midlife all-cause mortality rates increased from 328.5 deaths/100 000 to 348.2 deaths/100 000. By 2014, midlife mortality was increasing across all racial groups, caused by drug overdoses, alcohol abuse, suicides, and a diverse list of organ system diseases. The largest relative increases in midlife mortality rates occurred in New England (New Hampshire, 23.3%; Maine, 20.7%; Vermont, 19.9%) and the Ohio Valley (West Virginia, 23.0%; Ohio, 21.6%; Indiana, 14.8%; Kentucky, 14.7%). The increase in midlife mortality during 2010-2017 was associated with an estimated 33 307 excess US deaths, 32.8% of which occurred in 4 Ohio Valley states."  https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2756187?

Americans can't smoke, over eat, have multiple sex partners, sooth the soul with alcohol and become a zombie with drugs and not have it show up in a study down the road. Although the numbers ticked up 2010-2017, the behavior began much before that--the 1980's-1990s.

And that Ohio Valley information in the study--straight up from Mexico—black tar heroin.  Read “Dreamland; the true tale of America's Opioid Epidemic” by Sam Quinones. He was a speaker at Lakeside, I think in 2018.  The stories of young men in Mexico, independent of the drug cartels, in search of their own American Dream via the fast and enormous profits of trafficking cheap black-tar heroin to America’s rural and suburban addicts combined with Big Pharma.  https://nihrecord.nih.gov/2018/05/18/author-recounts-how-opioids-took-hold-america

Special needs adults also enjoy a good workout

I don't see many adults with Down Syndrome these days. Pre-natal testing has reduced their chances of surviving in the womb, along with the culture of death promoted by many in our culture. (Like Obama's advisor, Zeke Emanuel, a so called ethicist. He believes people my age shouldn’t be using up resources.) But there is one young woman who comes to the fitness center where I exercise in the morning, and with a trainer, has a great time. She works hard, follows his instructions, and he is rewarded with her great smile and laugh. After the workout he walks her to the door and waits there with her until her mother picks her up. It's just beautiful. Today I told him how much I appreciated seeing them together. He told me he used to coach a Special Olympics team, and loved it.

Abortions for babies with Down Syndrome are not has high as thought 20 years ago, and those statistics were based on Europe. In the U.S. we do not have a data base for this, but the latest research show it is 30%, and that varies with race and ethnicity. It is highest among Asian Americans at 61%.

https://lozierinstitute.org/new-study-abortion-after-prenatal-diagnosis-of-down-syndrome-reduces-down-syndrome-community-by-thirty-percent/

There are loving parents waiting to adopt a child with Down Syndrome, so if you know of a mom who is not prepared to parent and has received this diagnosis, put her in touch with https://www.ndsan.org/.

I noticed this comment from 2013 at that site:

My sweet angel, Colleen, was born on 7 March 1991. She was Down Syndrome, and had severe health problems since birth.

When she was born, I had no idea what the name “Down Syndrome” meant. But 22 years later, I know it means “Unconditional Love”! She taught me and my 2 older children so much about love, caring, acceptance and being grateful for the little blessings in life. Twice in her life the Lord used her to save 2 women who were ready to commit suicide! And she did not even realize what was happening. Her pure love changed their lives forever!

Colleen passed away on the 12 th July this year, in ICU, due to multiple organ failure. A huge part of my heart died with her. She was the single most precious blessing in my life

Vast majority like their health-care

Great news, right?

80% of Americans rate their health-care quality as excellent or good. Except it was 76% under Obama in 2015, and 83% under Bush in 2007.

All studies showed before Obama decided to take over health, that nearly 85% of Americans were satisfied with their health insurance (which is not always the same as health care), in fact, some didn't want insurance, others just hadn't signed up for state or federal government plans. Didn't matter. He wanted the power. Jail or fine if you didn't have the level of insurance the government demanded. So what if you're happy with what you have? It wasn't what Yo'mama Obama wanted.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/245195/americans-rate-healthcare-quite-positively.aspx

Five lifestyles which will prolong your life. . . maybe

Have you ever seen this statement--"Americans have a shorter life expectancy compared with residents of almost all other high-income countries." I wish they'd qualify that by race, ethnicity, immigration status and age. Are Swedish Americans less healthy than ethnic Swedes in Sweden? Finnish Americans worse off than those born in Helsinki? German Americans? Drugs, auto accidents, and gun deaths wipe out a big swath of young Americans which unfortunately drastically alters our life expectancy national statistics. Losing weight, eating a healthy diet, and exercising more are good for you as an individual, but probably won't change national statistics as long as those 3 killers are present.

Here's what the journal "Circulation" determined: "Adherence to 5 low-risk lifestyle-related factors (never smoking, a healthy weight, regular physical activity, a healthy diet, and moderate alcohol consumption) could prolong life expectancy at age 50 years by 14.0 and 12.2 years for female and male US adults compared with individuals who adopted zero low-risk lifestyle factors."

Simple, right? Popular health journals and websites (usually sponsored by pharmaceutical companies) have jumped on that one. Buckets of articles and bags of advice have come from that. But. As young adults, people (like me in the 1960s or my parents in the 1930s) observing those five lifestyles were probably not involved in violent gangs, car chases while drunk, stealing to support an opioid habit, or eating wings at the local bar and washing them down with 12 beers several times a week. Those five lifestyles often include a monogamous marriage, higher education levels, stable jobs, church attendance, strong family and friend relationships. It's not that grandma who smoked like a chimney and drank six beers a day didn't live to be 105, or that cousin Ralph dropped dead jogging at age 40, but they are the exception.

I haven't read the whole article, but I know how it will be cited: support take over by the government of our health insurance because look how unhealthy Americans are. Studies in countries with socialized medicine that compare their healthiest and their least healthy show the same spread as the U.S. and that there are income gaps, education disparity and socio-economic differences which government health insurance doesn't change.

This article is free access.  “Circulation” is one of the best peer reviewed journals you can read on cardiovascular issues. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.032047

USAFacts—a new way to gather government statistics

This non-profit has been launched by Steve Ballmer and wife Connie.  Although most non-profits established by wealthy capitalists claim to be non-partisan and unbiased, we’ll have to see about that.  When Ballmer gives interviews we’ll see the clues. But since I frequently use government statistics myself in making my points about medical costs, education, immigration, sex/gender, religion, animals, housing, etc., I welcome any source which can make sense of it all, particularly the blending of federal, state and local.  Federal dollars, for instance, are only 3% of total spending on education.

https://www.geekwire.com/2017/full-interview-steve-ballmer-discusses-usafacts-new-10-k-government/

“USAFacts is a new data-driven portrait of the American population, our government’s finances, and government’s impact on society. We are a non-partisan, not-for-profit civic initiative and have no political agenda or commercial motive. We provide this information as a free public service and are committed to maintaining and expanding it in the future.

We rely exclusively on publicly available government data sources. We don’t make judgments or prescribe specific policies. Whether government money is spent wisely or not, whether our quality of life is improving or getting worse – that’s for you to decide. We hope to spur serious, reasoned, and informed debate on the purpose and functions of government. Such debate is vital to our democracy. We hope that USAFacts will make a modest contribution toward building consensus and finding solutions.”

https://usafacts.org/

  

The plan is to divide all government statistics by the four items in the Preamble’s mission statement.

“Revenue And Spending

Government revenue and expenditures are based on data from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Census Bureau, and the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Each is published annually, although due to collection times, state and local government data are not as current as federal data. Thus, when combining federal, state, and local revenues and expenditures, the most recent year shown is 2014, the most recent year for which all three sets of data are available. We show government spending through two different lenses:

Spending by segment: We recategorized several programs and functions to align them with four constitutional missions based on the preamble to the constitution:

• Establish Justice and Ensure Domestic Tranquility
• Provide for the Common Defense
• Promote the General Welfare
• Secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and Our Posterity

This approach is modeled after what businesses do for their own management accountability and shareholder reporting. Public companies present their businesses in segments – a logical framework for discussing the areas in which the they operate. We do the same for government. In using this constitutional framework, we have made judgements in how we group programs. . .

Spending by function: We also show spending by functional categories such as compensation for current and past employees, capital expenditures, transfer payments to individuals, interest on the debt, and payments for goods and services. “

Who determines that healthcare is too high?

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average American family earned $74,664 (before taxes) and spent $57,311 across various expense categories in 2016.  [not sure what is “family”—probably means household—doesn’t give number of people] 

1. Taxes 2. housing 3. transportation 4. food 5. pensions and insurance 6. Entertainment and contributions 7.  health care

Taxes are the biggest chunk. $18,900 each year, and then housing, $18,886. “Following housing costs, transportation ($9,049), food ($7,203), and pensions and personal insurance ($6,831) topped the list for the biggest ticketed items on most Americans' budgets. For the majority of people who prefer not to cook, the cost of dining out could add up big. The occasional luxury experience may not seem like a big drain on the average budget, but entertainment, cash contributions, and apparel and services accounted for nearly $7,000 (over 10 percent) of most Americans' annual expenses.”  Health care was $4,612. That said, health care increased almost 67% between 2006 and 2016, 8 years of which Obama was taking over our health insurance choices.

https://www.creditloan.com/blog/how-the-average-us-consumer-spends-their-paycheck/

Do you know the sex/gender terminology?

Grant #2011-JF-FX-0001  Urban Institute  “Access to Safety, Health Outcomes, Substance Use and Abuse, and Service Provision for LGBTQ Youth, YMSM, and YWSW Who Engage in Survival Sex “https://www.urban.org/research/publication/access-safety-health-outcomes-substance-use-and-abuse-and-service-provision-lgbtq-youth-ymsm-and-ywsw-who-engage-survival-sex   

This report provides a list of definitions for LGBTQ youth at risk for health problems. It was sort of wordy, so I condensed a bit.  In a discussion group we were noting the changing terminology.

Cisgender: Individuals whose experiences of their gender match the sex they were assigned at birth.

Gender expression: The aspects of behavior and outward presentation that may (intentionally or unintentionally) communicate gender to others in a given culture or society.

Gender nonconforming: People who have or are perceived to have gender characteristics or behaviors that do not conform to traditional or societal expectations. Gender-nonconforming people may or may not identify as transgender.

Sexual orientation: Whom a person is physically and emotionally attracted to. Sexual orientation is distinct from gender identity; transgender people may identify as heterosexual, bisexual, gay, lesbian, or any other sexual orientation.

Transgender: People whose gender identity (internal sense of being female, male, or another gender) is incongruent with their sex assigned at birth (physical body).

Young men who have sex with men (YMSM): Young men who may identify as heterosexual but have sex with members of the same sex, often in exchange for money and/or material goods.

Young women who have sex with women (YWSW): Young women who may identify as hetero-sexual but have sex with members of the same sex, often in exchange for money and/or material goods.

Exploiter: An individual who uses tactics involving force, fraud, and coercion to control a young person’s involvement in the commercial sex market.

Peer facilitator: A peer, who may or may not be engaged in survival sex, who provides nonexploitative support to someone engaging in survival sex, so the person engaging in survival sex does not have limited mobility; decides what they do and what they trade sex for; and is not subject to force, fraud, or coercion.

Youth engaged in survival sex: The phrases “youth engaged in survival sex” and “youth who exchange sex for money and/or material goods (e.g., shelter, food, and drugs)” are used here to reflect young people’s experiences of involvement in the commercial sex market in their own terms.

Gay family: An alternative familial network of LGBTQ people that may act as an alternative to the family of origin from which many LGBTQ people, particularly youth, have been excluded. The term may also be used to refer to drag houses in the ball scene.

Ball scene/house culture: A community consisting primarily of black and Latino and Latina LGBTQ people organized around anchoring family-like structures, called houses, and competitive balls. [I’d never heard of Ball Culture, but you can find a description in Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_culture .  Apparently, Langston Hughes in the 1920s described it.)

Barrier and nonbarrier protection: Any contraceptive or other protective device or method used to prevent unwanted pregnancy or the transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or other STDs.

 Interesting findings about the almost 300 youth in this study (this is the 3rd report):

99% of these LGBTQ at risk youth in this study were using contraceptives (barrier and nonbarrier). [A quick look shows that compares with about 50% of non LGBTQ teens)

93% were using the services of a helping agency, 99% accepted help from them and 94% said they would seek help from that agency again

only 5% in the study were white.

47% male, 36% female, 11% transwoman (i.e.biological male), 3% transman (biological female), 5% other, not specified, or wouldn’t say

These youth are at greater risk than heterosexual male and female youth for violence, abuse, sexual victimization, mental health risks,  sexually transmitted diseases, and homelessness

Other reports funded by this grant

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/71446/2000424-Locked-In-Interactions-with-the-Criminal-Justice-and-Child-Welfare-Systems-for-LGBTQ-Youth-YMSM-and-YWSW-Who-Engage-in-Survival-Sex.pdf

Statistics run wild

Socialized or single payer health insurance will not change some health problems that are unique to the United States, says N. Gregory Mankiw in the New York Times.

For some clarity about life expectancy and health care let's look at research before Obamacare became the lightning rod. The murder rate, particularly among young black men, the obesity rate and lifestyle choices, traffic accidents, and our high immigration rates that include people with poor health, might indicate social patterns that need addressing, but they are not functions of the health care system.

Unfortunately, this bit of advice on health insurance was ignored. “Any reform should carefully focus on this group to avoid disrupting the vast majority for whom the system is working. We do not nationalize an industry simply because a small percentage of the work force is unemployed. Similarly, we should be wary of sweeping reforms of our health system if they are motivated by the fact that a small percentage of the population is uninsured.”

http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2009/06/health-care-becker.html

"A study published in Lancet Oncology in 2007 calculates cancer survival rates for both men and women in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union as a whole. The study claims that the most important determinants of cancer survival are early diagnosis, early treatment, and access to the best drugs, and that the United States does very well on all three criteria. Early diagnosis helps survival, but it may also distort the comparisons of five or even ten-year survival rates. In any case, the calculated five-year survival rates are much better in the US: they are about 65% for both men and women, while they are much lower in the other countries, especially for men. These apparent advantages in cancer survival rates are large enough to be worth a lot to persons having access to the American health system. Several measures of the quality of life also favor the US. For example, hip and knee replacements, and cataract surgery, are far more readily available in the US than in Europe. The cancer survival and quality of life advantages enjoyed by US residents indicates that Americans get something for the large amount they spend on health care, but they do not indicate that the bang for the health buck is greater in the US, or even that the US health delivery system is reasonably efficient."

Where does that uninsured figure come from?

In the last 5 years I've seen the "uninsured" figure ranging from 35 to 45 million.  First, for my foreign FaceBook and blogger friends (and my Democrat trolls), all Americans have access to health care, and a small percentage to not have insurance or private funds to pay for that care.  Second, the high figure of uninsured is based on our U.S. Census, which counts people, not citizens, so about 10 million of whatever figure you chose, are not Americans. Third, that figure is a snapshot of a point in time and includes people between jobs, students leaving college coverage, or workers moving into their own business who haven't yet purchased what is appropriate for their needs. Fourth, it includes people (about 14 million) who are eligible for one of our many government plans for special groups, but they just haven't signed on. They find it easier to just go to the ER or a free clinic. And then there are those with higher incomes who pay out of pocket, and like it that way (about 17 million). Fifth, about 18 million are under 34, the healthiest age group who are willing to gamble (because that's how youth are) nothing can happen to them and they'd rather spend the money at the mall or the bar. Some of these groups overlap and are counted twice--young, leaving college, changing jobs, and/or well off due to family circumstances.

The two worst features of our BO (before Obamacare) health insurance system (not health care, which is very good) is that it is tied to employment (big tax breaks for employers and workers—which our current administration sees as a loop hole) and not portable, and that it is so highly regulated by state governments that only the really big players have a say in it.  For instance, the problem of not being able to sell across state lines so the citizen can freely select the best policy.

It shouldn't have been difficult to correct those faults and insure the people who were showing up at the ER, skipping vaccinations, and too ill or deranged to work, but that would not have given the federal government any additional power, nor have satisfied the desire of many Americans to be relieved of all guilt and demand to look out for the little guy by letting the government do it all.

http://spectator.org/articles/41931/myth-46-million

ObamaCare and your insurance premiums. There’s no free lunch.

Despite indignant Democratic denials, the near-certainty is that their plan will cause costs to rise across the board. The latest data on this score come from a series of state-level studies from the insurance company WellPoint Inc. Using their own data it modeled ObamaCare in 14 states. Democrats who can‘t read their own bills or return calls and e-mails of worried voters, were lightning fast on trashing WellPoints data:

In all of the 14 states WellPoint scrutinized, ObamaCare would drive up premiums for the small businesses and individuals who are most of WellPoint's customers. (Other big insurers, like Aetna, focus on the market among large businesses.) Young and healthy consumers will see the largest increases—their premiums would more than triple in some states—though average middle-class buyers will pay more too.

Not even two hours after Wellpoint had presented its materials on the Hill, Democrats were already trashing it—which, considering that it runs to some 238 pages and took weeks to prepare, must have required remarkable powers of digestion and analysis. Link

HT Pauli

This bill is a travesty

Life expectancy needs to be looked at within the context of the success rate of treatments. If you can't get treated because of rationing, or you're too old to fit into the comparative studies, or there have been no innovations for Alzheimer's or diabetes due to the death of free markets, it won't make any difference how many of those 10% not currently insured get it, or how many illegals you sign up for benefits.

HT Mary

Health care two years ago

When it looked like the battle would be between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Edwards and both were talking health care reform, I wrote the following in May 2007. As usual, I found holes in the left's arguments about our health care and coverage. Hillary has gone on to be neutered and banished in her role as Secretary of State, and John-Boy of the beautiful hair and loose morals is now paying for a new baby. Obama sneaked up on them by staying on task and having very smart handlers.

"Whenever government controlled health care is trotted out, the left points out miserable statistics about who isn't covered by insurance, our infant death rate, and how our per capita health care costs (government + private) are the highest in the world.

The left, particularly feminists and pols who depend on a steady supply of victims, won't point some dirty little secrets they've contributed to the problem of poverty and health care. For instance, more than one third of infants in the U.S. are born to single mothers, most never married, teens and non-white. Many of these babies are premature and will require extraordinary health care costs the rest of their lives. They will struggle in school, need special classes, and go on to have more babies. What and who has promoted removing men from the family and giving women money to do so with Uncle Sam as the absent step-father? The federal government and the programs, although well-intentioned at the beginning, have been promoted and marketed by the left. Conservatives, not wanting to be "mean" have gone along, and along and along, contributing to the problem through inaction and acquiescence. The liberals only solution to the problems they helped create is to kill the little ones before they are born and enroll in the system.

We have millions and millions of illegals in this country. Liberals encourage them to be illiterate in two languages in the failed name of diversity and multiculturalism. They are not learning English--some are afraid to leave their homes, let alone learn how to call for a squad or read a prescription. They miss or don't know about vaccinations and don't get health problems taken care of until they show up in the ER. They can't read to get a valid driver's license. They bring in diseases that have long been conquered in this country. Who is protecting and encouraging them in this unhealthy life style? Not conservatives.

Why would you compare this mess to Canada, which easily controls its borders (one being ours, one being too cold, and two being too wet) and rations health care or to Argentina which is 98% European and mono-cultural with zero diversity and strict immigration?

We already have government health care; it's called Medicaid for the poor and Medicare for the over 65. It is expensive and rationed. Why would the rest of you want it? When the new shingles vaccine became available the first thing I was told was that Medicare didn't cover it--so I paid for it because it is worth it (I've seen shingles and definitely want to avoid it). My Medigap policy is very expensive and doesn't always cover and by the time I finally get the bill that has been passed around, it is 6 months later and I've forgotten the appointment--and that's what the rest of you want?

Next time you hear Hillary or John-Boy touting universal government health care, peek under the rug and ask which universe and how much care."

Health care myths, pt. 2

Can the government do health care cheaper. No, that's a myth, or just a bald face lie. I was really puzzled by a report on rare and neglected diseases (TRND). Seems it costs private drug companies 2-4 years and $10 million to get a candidate molecule through preclinical development. Big hearted Congress is going to appropriate $24 million to work in this preclinical area and then pass it on to the drug companies for clinical trials. Maybe I'm math challenged, but even if the government could do something less costly (costs are probably high due to gov't regs), isn't that 2.5 molecules? Plus it wants "some funding from licensing." Sort of like owning a car company, heh?

And remember you won't pay higher taxes? Well, what is a user fee passed along to the consumer, if not a tax? In the omnibus spending bill for 2009 signed March 11 by Obama, Congress appropriated $1 billion for the FDA to regulate human drugs and biologics, which is made up in part from new user fees paid by the industries (google PDUFA). And I'm only guessing, but we'll still be getting our generics from India and China without the quality controls in order to "cut costs." (Have you forgotten pet food and lead in paint of children's toys?)

Also, a part of the big lie about costs is that what they shave off the federal ledger for health will be shifted to the states--and we all know what great shape Medicaid is in! States pay half of Medicaid now. How far back in time are they planning to go to recover those costs from surviving family members? Five years? Ten years? Also, if there is a profession with more garbled, obfuscation in its flowing prose than politics, it has to be medicine. Please translate into English or dollars

"accessible, comprehensive, integrated care based on healing relationships"

But perhaps the biggest problem with the "cost" lie is that cost is all Americans care about, and it's the most critical measure we have against some mythical, socialist industrialized nation with rationed care. Americans really do care about safety, timeliness, respect, quality, choice, outcomes and efficiency. Also, for every life we save with surgery, new drugs,chemo, or new technology, that's a life that is going to require even more care--very expensive, monitored and lab test care--than before the life-saving event. The person who dies on a waiting list in Europe saves their government a lot of money. Unfortunately, that's the sort of community spirit Obama wants for us.

Swine flu deaths now at 12

Another 30,000 and there will be as many as the regular, non-hyped flu.

Health Disparities in the U.S.

This is certainly puzzling. The March 18 issue of JAMA has an article on health care in the U.S. that reports the U.S. has the 3rd highest poverty rate in OECD countries, below Turkey and Mexico, and that the U.S. poor have such poor health care that some are in poverty because of health expenses. Hmmm. That's odd. "Our poor" have government sponsored and paid for health care--it's called Medicaid, and SCHIP, plus all manner of other benefits under other programs of HHS and USDA. Isn't that what Obama wants for all of us? Obamacare doesn't work you say?

Also, when I read these articles comparing the U.S. health care to other countries, I notice our illegals are not separated out in the census count, even though other countries are much, much tougher (Mexico, for instance) on illegals invading their countries and asking for social services. I wonder how much medical care an illegal Guatemalan receives from the Mexican government? Or how does an illegal Pakistani worker get medical care in Turkey?

As much as I enjoy reading JAMA, it definitely runs like tarbaby through the brairpatch chasing social issues instead of medical cures and disease findings. They haven't a clue how to control obesity, smoking, alcohol/drug abuse or sexual promiscuity, the big four of personal behaviors causing health problems, so they just move on to the economy, job losses, stress, and housing crises. More grant money from the government for the folks with MPH, PHD, and MSW behind their names, so at least their jobs won't be at risk. Just churn out more studies.

Maybe we should have the UK healthcare as reported by users recently in the Daily Mail, per Belmont Club.

Some readers of the Daily Mail sent accounts of their own experience.

“My wife had treatment at this hospital and it was beyond belief. Staff tried to get my wife to believe she had already been given her tablets when they hadn’t; later admitting they ran out and did not want to call out the Pharmacy! People were screaming for the toilet as their requests for assistance went unheeded.”
Mick, Stafford

“My mother in law died at a hospital where her ‘care’ was almost non-existant. She died screaming in pain because nobody could be found to replace her morphine pump.” Claire, Norfolk

“When my father was in hospital for months, he lay in a bed with dirty, torn blankets and grubby sheets. I asked to see the Hospital Manager and was walked through the most plush of offices. I was sickened and told her so.” Sammy, UK

“My sister recently qualified as a nurse. During her training a fellow student commented to a manager that a doctor hadn’t bothered to change his scrubs after undertaking a minor operation on a patient and wore the same ones for his next operation. She was warned any whistle blowing of that sort would result in her being kicked out.” Jo, Middlesex

Deja Vu all over again

"How good is government medical care?" asks Osler L. Peterson. Has a familiar ring, doesn't it? You really think you're reading today's arguments about healthcare--the fact that European countries already have it and their citizens are doing fine, that many elderly are suffering under high costs, and that there are already programs for the poor. But it was published in The Atlantic Monthly in September 1960 (the month I got married). This wakes you up.

"The Health Insurance Institute estimates that “getting sick and getting well” will cost the average American $105 in 1960. This sum will be distributed about as follows: $34 for the hospital, $26 for the doctor, $28 for medicines, $11.50 for the dentist, and $5.50 for other costs. The average United States family in 1957-1958 spent a little over $300 for medical care. These averages are influenced by many factors. Those with hospital insurance received more care than those without, and families with higher incomes spent more than those with smaller ones."

Using Measuring Worth (which only goes through 2006) we can look at several ways to see $105, the CPI probably being the most familiar.

In 2006, $105.00 from 1960 is worth:

$714.65 using the Consumer Price Index
$581.70 using the GDP deflator
using the value of consumer bundle *
$849.03 using the unskilled wage
$1,586.70 using the nominal GDP per capita
$2,631.92 using the relative share of GDP

I don't know if there is an accurate figure on health care costs--it depends on what think tank and which lobbyist are beholden to which party. I know ours is terribly high and we have "government health care," i.e. Medicare. This site says it is over $6,000 per person a year--not the best, just the most expensive.

What's probably changed since 1960 is indigent care. The son of a friend recently had an appendectomy--was hospitalized four or five days. He is unemployed and uninsured. It cost him nothing at the hospital down the road where it is $5,000+ a day to have a room in which to recover, and that doesn't cover the doctor and lab costs. If he'd been insured, he would have had a deductible and a co-pay, and the hospital might have had strict insurance guidelines on how long he could stay, or his employer might have lost its coverage. Under managed care, doctors and hospitals are no longer allowed to do what's best for the patient, only what's best for the bottom line. Imagine how much worse it will be with a committee of bureaucrats. The Katrina Care Plan, I like to call it.

But another thing that has changed since 1960 is heroic measures for people with a very limited life expectancy. An 85 year old dear man we know has several systems failing at once. Any one of them could kill him, but he had surgery this week for the most serious--he was given only 2 months to live if this wasn't repaired. I truly don't know what I would do if it were me, or my parent or husband, and none of us do until it happens to us. My mother had surgery for colon cancer in her 80s and had another wonderful five years with her family and husband, celebrating 65 years of marriage, dying of something totally unrelated. My father had a heart by-pass when he was 70 and lived another 19 years, needing to replace a few pacemakers and outliving some of his doctors.

Do you have the answers to how much is too much? Because you know well, without private supplemental policies, none of the above examples would be covered under Katrina Care.