Why an NHS-style system is not realistic here in the United States:
The British are often held up as the standard to which we should aspire. But we don’t live under a British style of government. We live under a government that’s truly government of the people, by the people, for the people. And what the people want, the people get . . . In England, the government only pays for colonoscopies to check for colon cancer if there are symptoms suggestive of cancer or a family history of colon cancer. In the United States, the Medicare pays for a colonoscopy every ten years for everyone over 50, regardless of symptoms or risk . . .In England, mammograms are only covered for women between the ages of 50 and 70, and then only every three years. In the United States, we pay for mammograms beginning at age 40, yearly, and with no upper age limit. We just don’t have the heart for rationing that they have in other countries.
Related posts:
- Is it fair to compare American health care with systems in Europe or Canada?
- Government-run health care: Further depersonalizing medicine
- Marrying a Canadian for health care
- Government-run health care and corruption
- When government has you by the balls, redux
- Countries with worse health care systems than the United States
- An attempt to stave off government-controlled health care
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 3 comments }
So. Please explain how we can’t do the screenings listed above when we are currently spending twice as much per capita for healthcare even in a nationalized system?
The cost of our system is double that of Britain’s. Is the cost of those extra colonoscopies and mammograms really gonna chew that up?
There are lots of other things that are done too often in the US, in my opinion, such as stress tests in asymptomatic patients post-CABG, frequent lipid panels, PSAs, and these things often lead to further tests or medications. Have you noticed how just about every xray report suggests an additional xray? This drives me nuts. In addition, patients get at least partial payment for alot of medications and treatments here that I doubt they would get in England, ie Viagra, fertility treatment, toenail fungus treatment, sleep aids, all of which are really quality of life issues (not life or death). So yes, I think the article is right.
Not–but that adds to many other things. To slow escalating costs in the NHS (yes they have out of control costs also) they are now going to require women to have natural childbirth. They will be attended by an obstetritian or midwife only if they are having complications.
How will they know who is having complications?
No way will the American people put up with that. They put up with it because they are subjects, we are citizens.
Comments on this entry are closed.