METRO UK:
OVER HALF WAIT MORE THAN 3.5 MONTHS.Less than half of NHS patients are starting treatment within the Government's pledged target of 18 weeks, new figures reveal.YUP:12% WAIT FOR MORE REPEAT MORE THAN A YEAR.
The Government has promised that no patient should wait more than 18 weeks from a GP referral to the start of treatment by the end of 2008.
But only 48 per cent of patients in England are treated within that time – and 12 per cent have to wait more than a year, according to the Department of Health figures yesterday.
ONLY 48% GET TREATMENT IN LESS THAN 3 MONTHS.
IF TAX-PAYER FUNDED UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE DOESN'T WORK THERE, THEN WHY DO IT HERE? IT MAKES NO SENSE.
YET THAT'S WHAT THE DEMS WANT TO DO.
DON'T FALL FOR IT. (ADDITIONAL FACTS AND FIGURES HERE FROM THE UK GUARDIAN.)
I am on pins and needles, in anticipation of your review of the movie "Sicko".
ReplyDeleteYou do plan to view it, I hope?
hi dave;
ReplyDeletei'll go with what th ccanadian press said in cannes: it is all wrong. canada's healthcare sucks, and moore distorted it in his moviie to make it look good.
the PRESS. in cannes.
also:
the NYTIMES did a piece which demolished moore's distortions of cuba's healthcare system.
as rosie says" google it!
you can easily do this at the NYTIMEs website; they have a little window calleed SEARCH. in pout cuba. and scroll.
wake up dave.
Is that your way of saying you don't intend to view the movie yourself, but will instead rely on others to review it for you?
ReplyDeleteCome on- it's right up your alley! I could spend all day reading others' support or opposition to the movie, but I want to hear what you think about it.
Certainly, the fact that Fox News commends the movie and Moore must intrigue you a little?
moore is in the tradition of other greatsocialist filmmakers/propagandists: riefenstahl and triumph of the will comes to mind.
ReplyDeleteknew you'd love him.
please read ther nytimes on cuba's heathcare system and how moore's m ovie LIES about it.
Well, I just read it (the NY Times piece) and far from "demolishing" Moore's claims, it informs the reader that there are, in fact, valid reasons that Cubans' life expectancy roughly equals the USA:
ReplyDelete"He (Dr. Robert M. Butler) said a principal reason that some health standards in Cuba approach the high American level is that the Cuban system emphasizes early intervention. Clinic visits are free, and the focus is on preventing disease rather than treating it."
BTW, that is not Moore talking, that happens to be a Pulitzer-prize winning author who traveled to Cuba to see how doctors are trained.
OK, so I guess it's your turn to show how the NY Times piece demolished Moore's claims. That is, if you've read it yourself...
1 - QUOTE:
ReplyDeleteOf course, many people regard any figures about Cuba as at least partly fiction. But even if the longevity statistics are correct, they are open to interpretation. Carmelo Mesa-Lago, a professor emeritus of economics at the University of Pittsburgh, said statistics also show that Cuba has a high rate of abortion, which can lower infant mortality rates and improve life expectancy figures. The constant flow of refugees also may affect longevity figures, since those births are recorded but the deaths are not.
2 - QUOTE:
Having practiced medicine in both Cuba and the United States, Dr. Cordova has an unusual perspective for comparison.
“Actually there are three systems,” Dr. Cordova said, because Cuba has two: one is for party officials and foreigners like those Mr. Moore brought to Havana. “It is as good as this one here, with all the resources, the best doctors, the best medicines, and nobody pays a cent,” he said.
But for the 11 million ordinary Cubans, hospitals are often ill equipped and patients “have to bring their own food, soap, sheets — they have to bring everything.” And up to 20,000 Cuban doctors may be working in Venezuela, creating a shortage in Cuba.
3 - QUOTE:
Until he had to have emergency surgery last year, Fidel Castro — who turned 80 this year — was considered a model of vibrant long life in Cuba. But it was only last week that he acknowledged in an open letter that his initial surgery by Cuban doctors had been botched. He did not confirm, however, that a specialist had been flown in from Spain last December to help set things right.
BOTTOM-LINE:
No one goes TO cuba for healthcare; they riosk theior lives to come here.
Plenty of Cubans risk their lives to come here- but it's not for the healthcare.
ReplyDelete...and actually, the climax of "Sicko" is when Moore brings health victims (from 9/11) To Cuba, for healthcare.
I have yet to see how Michael Moore's point, namely, "We can have our political differences, but on issues like this, we have to come together." demolished in any way.
You can view his interview with Oprah here.
the best care in Cuba is reserved for the UPPER CLASS: friends of Fidel. Most Cubans get lousy care, abnd they are willing to give it up and those WONDERFUL schools for freedom.
ReplyDeletethe BESTEST possible care for Cubans come - EVIDENTLY - by importing FOREIGN DOCTORS. As fidel's case PROVES.
i do not believe fidel's stats on anything anymore than i'd believe joe stalin's.
there is no free press there - spomething which doesn;t seem to bother you or your fellow traveller Moore.
fidel won;t even allow cuban's to read old paperbacks from the USA; he returned containers of them a few years back.
cuba is a totalitarian state with lousy healthcare for most. just like the USSR.
canada's and the UK's health systems also SUCK; moore and you can go there whenever you want, but when canadians want BETTER care they come here.
elton john's "partner" recemntly attacked moore for claiming/arguing that the UK health system was better. he and elton always seeks care in the USA.
why are you defemnding a tyrnat like fidel?
why do you attack me who wants people to be free?
because you are a leftist stooge brainwashed.
open your eyes.
the truth is out there.
DAVID DUNKLE:
ReplyDeleteplease do an NHS label search at TAB and read all the articles i've linked to FROM THE BRIT PRESS about how HORRIBLE the NHS is.
it'll open your eyes.
Hey, you with the false persecution complex: disagreeing with you doesn't count as an attack. I've learned that the really good barbs I throw at you simply get deleted off your site. So now I'm careful to keep some civility in my comments, and let you handle the attacks.
ReplyDeleteI'm not defending Castro any more than you are buddying-up with Elton John's partner.
Apparently you feel that the profit-based USA system provides equitable and suitable healthcare to all its citizens. No improvements can be learned from more socialist systems. My experience is that you'll support that belief right up until you get ripped off by either an insurance company or the likes of Walter Reed.
I do give you credit, however, in proving that this is not an issue that we must all come together on.
- David Dunkle
...you know, I sorta prefer the way you write it; in ALL CAPS:
- DAVID DUNKLE
YAWN.
ReplyDeleteof course davey baby; you answered not a one single one of my points.
typical leftist.
i proved the nytimes artricle was filled with criticism of castro's system.
so now ypou switch tatcics and merely say we have something to learn from socialist systems.
OM THIS WE AGREE.
i think we can learn that taxpayer financed universal care sucks. and it is not affordable.
we need to expand msa's.
davey... another thing: i know of illegal immigrants who get INCREDIBLE and FREE healthcare for chirnic illnesses at local hospitals.
paid for by you and me.
i don't want to pay for THEIR care.
i don't want you to pay for mine.
and another thing:
in the UK there is now a movement afoot by LIBERALS to deny care to smokers. RATIONALE: it's a lifestyle choice which increases risk of disease, so the state shouldn't pay for it.
well, how about homosexuality? and eating fatty foods?
if the nannystate is paying for your healthcare then they have a say in your behavior.
that's fascist.
and nationalizing healthcare is the road to fascism/serfdom.
tinkaboudit.
i mean THINKABOUTIT TROLL.
we nned to privatioze all healthcare in the usa and privatize pensions/soc.sec.
we'd be empowering people.
like this:
see, if you pout your poayroll tazes in an IRA type thing at 4%/year, then at the endof 40 yras you're a millionaire. and you can leave that doughrayme to your kids.
but if that tax goes into the "trust fund" then all you get is a lousy monthly check, and when you croak and are food for worms your kids get bupkuss.
privatizing soc.sec would be a great BENEFIT to the working poor and could wipe put poverty in 60 years.
in fact. it would MOSTLY benefit the working poor.
lefty libs like you killed it.
ditto the MSA's.
the working middle class guy or gal is HEALTHIEST from the ages of 20-50. that's whn you have the LOWEST MEDICAL EXPENSES, (typically).
most medical expenses occur after the age of 65.
but that's when the TAXPAYER has to foot the bill.
INSTEAD... if the 20 year old pout his insurance money into an MSA, and bought a cheaper catastrophic healthplan, then at age 65 he could afford anything himself. including a GREAT health insurance plan (like the Congressmen get!).
since s/he can SAVE HIS OWN MONEY BY ENGAGING IN ONLY HEALTHY BEHAVIORS, this would give a great INCENTIVE for folks to give up smoking and unprotected sex, bad diets, etc.
privatization works.
collectivization doesn't.
that's what human history proves.
that's HUMAN NATURE.