Health Care: Costs Too Much, Delivers Too Little
The United States health care system ranks remarkably low in comparison to that of its global competitors, according to a newly released report. Factoring in cost, coverage and quality among other statistics like life expectancy and death rates, this report comes from the Business Roundtable, an association of chief executives at some of the top U.S. businesses. Based on a 100-point scale of this cost-benefit evaluation, the U.S. system lagged well behind five of its major economic competitors: Canada, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom and France -- as well as the health care systems of developing nations like Brazil, China and India.
In short, the study authors say, the costs and performance of the U.S. health care system have "put America’s companies and workers at a significant competitive disadvantage in the global marketplace." The Business Roundtable also reports that Americans spend at least two and a half times more per person on health care than do people in any other developed nation.
There is a wealth of public opinion data on the topic of health care, and the most prominent area of consensus is that cost and access are paramount. But many are divided over the extent to which reform should take place and what role the government should play. President Obama himself has talked about the "crushing cost" of health care and the need for reform -- but it has yet to be seen just how he will go about implementing such change. He certainly has his work cut out for him. Then again, perhaps we all do: health care reform isn't going to happen without active participation and consent on the part of citizens.
See the complete Business Roundtable report here, and be sure to check out our Citizen's Survival Kit Guide to health care issues.
Tags: 
Should the U.S. have universal heatlh care? It's a great question. Check out this interesting debate on Opposing Views to get various perspectives. You'll get health and religious viewpoints all in one place.
It's hard for me to believe that there are intelligent people who actually don't support universal health care; we spend so much time talking about the financial possibility and almost none talking about the real impact a lack of insurance has on people's live. for a great example check out a debate on this exact issue: http://www.opposingviews.com/questions/should-the-us-have-universal-heal...
Adding to the health care cost crisis, hospitals are now feeling the effects of the recession. In fact, approximately 50 percent of hospitals were unprofitable in the third quarter of 2008. This could lead to a new host of health care problems that we haven't even seen yet.
Healthcare is receiving the same top down ruination as insurance, banking and investment. Though I will say that heathcare's ruin is a function of insurance becoming closer and more involved with healthcare. The problem now is the cart is leading the horse on most things, organizations are trying to bend reality to fit statistics rather than merely tracking reality with them.
Take the case of my grandfather, medical insurance killed him outright. When he retired the insurance switched so he had to go by different guidelines. He was a huge guy, but it wasn't a case of him being overweight or a body builder or anything like that, he had a vary large frame*. To keep medical insurance he had to get down to 208 lbs, no exceptions, no common sense, no review. He succeeded in that but he was nothing but a large rib cage with spindly stick arms and legs, he died a few years later after years of excellent health before this. (*At retirement he was a lot smaller than he used to be but was still 6'1" and had a 54" chest)
How is this making the system worse?
His death made that height/weight category in the actuarial tables that much of a higher risk, making insurance companies want to narrow them further. This of course is going to self reinforce making the tables more skewed and idiotic. Even worse than this is use of the BMI. The BMI was made off the cuff in the 1800s (when people were 6" shorter) by a sociologist and were restricted to the Dutch. Besides being based on a population that has a slighter build than many, the height difference is also going to play havoc as people didnt just get taller over time the whole build got larger. BTW using the BMI Michael Jordan is obese, he doesn't have that wide of a frame nor is he pumped up that much, what hope do the rest of us have?
In addition to stupidly applying statistics to general health measures without any common sense checks they're also applied to medical procedures without review.
I personally went in with gall bladder trouble, we'll skip the years of having attacks, nothing showing on MRI, CAT scan, xray or ultrasound, being given antibiotics and sent home. What happened in my case is I finally turned yellow so they definitely knew there was a specific problem. They decided on an endoscopic procedure and removed stones as this was policy, ignoring the fact that it was a problem I had for years. They were back less than a week later so they removed my gall bladder, which was too scarred from years of trouble, which they knew about, but they had to try it laproscopically first because this was policy. So I was under for a long time, so I got to cough my guts up with a fresh gall bladder incision in addition to the laproscopic cuts. Anyway, I ended up in the hospital 13 times total with more stones, stents, a sphincterectomy, post op infection and stones that are invisible to any modern imaging technique. Had the doctor been able to make a judgment call based on my previous history of extensive troubles and nothing showing on any imaging the gall bladder could have been removed from the get go, likely with most of the stones and less infection risk and not tried laproscopically due to very likely scarring barring that due to the length and intensity of the problems, the whole thing would have cost a quarter a million less and I would have been much happier. Instead I got statistically derived policy.
BTW, all my veins hurt for two years after, any time I coughed or sneezed it was pure agony. I thank 10x exposure to Versed for that. Also, all of my joints and tendons hurt, especially if used much, and they go through periods where they itch an insane amount, which goes away with an excessive amount of massage but that makes whatever tendons used to massage hurt, at least I can sleep with the pain a lot better than the itching. For these symptoms I'd like to thank Cipro and that entire class of antibiotics. And no, they're not psychosomatic, I researched after putting up with the odd new symptoms for over two years.
" If the global economy were a 100-metre dash, the U.S. would start 23 metres behind its closest competitors because of health care that costs too much and delivers too little, a business group says.
The report from the Business Roundtable, which represents CEOs of major companies, says America's health care system has become a liability in a global economy.
Concern about high U.S. costs has existed for years, and business executives -- whose companies provide health coverage for workers -- have long called for getting costs under control.
Now U.S. President Barack Obama says the costs have become unsustainable and the system must be overhauled.
Americans spend US$2.4 trillion a year on health care. The Business Roundtable report says Americans in 2006 spent US$1,928 per capita on health care, at least two-and-a-half times more per person than any other advanced country.
In a different twist, the report took those costs and factored benefits into the equation.
It compares statistics on life expectancy, death rates and even cholesterol readings and blood pressures. The health measures are factored together with costs into a 100-point ""value"" scale. That hasn't been done before, the authors said.
The results are not encouraging.
The United States is 23 points behind five leading economic competitors: Canada, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom and France. The five nations cover all their citizens and, though their systems differ, in each country the government plays a much larger role than in the U.S."
Post new comment