American health care system outperforms ?
"A new study by the Karolinska Institute in Sweden shows that the American health care system outperforms the socialized systems in Europe in getting new medicines to cancer patients. The difference saves lives, and the existing Western European systems force people to die at higher rates from the same cancers, although the Telegraph buries that lede. The researchers studied Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, South Africa and the US, as well as 19 European countries, with a total population of 984 million, and looked at access to 67 newer cancer drugs. They found that the proportions of female cancer patients surviving five years beyond diagnosis in France, Spain, Germany, Italy were 71 per cent, 64 per cent, 63 per cent and 63 per cent respectively. In the UK it was 53 per cent. Among men the proportions still alive at five years in the same countries were 53 per cent, 50 per cent, 53 per cent and 48 per cent. Again in the UK it was lower at 43 per cent."
The survivability rates beyond five years of diagnosis in the United States are far in excess of all of these socialized countries with socialized medicine. Here’s the point, though, and it takes a while in the story for it to show up. Here’s the reference in the story about the American system. "Dr. Nils Wilking, a clinical oncologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, said: "Our report highlights that in many countries new drugs are not reaching patients quickly enough and that this is having an adverse impact on patient survival. Where you live can determine whether you receive the best available treatment or not. To some extent this is determined by economic factors, but much of the variation between countries remains unexplained. In the US we have found that the survival of cancer patients is significantly related to the introduction of new oncology drugs.’ … The proportion of colorectal cancer patients with access to the drug Avastin was 10 times higher in the US than it was in Europe, with the UK having a lower uptake than the European average."
United States health care saves more lives than socialized medicine, and yet socialized medicine is one of the building blocks of the Democrat Party’s agenda, particularly Mrs. Bill Clinton’s agenda. Now, it’s the same thing with tax revenue that we were just discussing. If current tax rates are producing record amounts of revenue and rapid economic growth, why would you change it? If the US health care system is the best in the world, despite its flaws — if it’s the best in the world and people who come down with deadly diseases survive much longer here because of access to drugs much sooner and much cheaper than people who live in socialized countries have access to it — why in the world would you change it? Well, there’s a simple answer. Socialists want control. They want as much control over us as they can get. It’s about power. It’s about enlarging the State. It’s about making you dependent, and that eliminates your threatening their power. The less wealth you have, the less mobility, freedom, the less of a threat you are to their power. This is liberalism through and through.
Now you might ask: "How come so many average Americans are liberals and they’re willing to give up this power?" Because they’re dupes. I’m talking about the leaders. I’m talking about the people in Washington. I’m talking about the think tank leaders. I’m talking about the special interest groups. Liberals in this country, these doofuses that write the hateful comments on Internet blogs, they’re just unhappy people in general. They want everybody else to be miserable with them anyway. They’re probably jealous of people who do better than them and they want those people taken down a peg or two. They want everything the same. Everything the same. No inequality. No inequity. They want outcome of results. They’re sickos and they’re miserable and they’re unhappy and they want everybody to join them in that. But you talk about ideology? Liberals believe this and conservatives believe this. It’s really very, very simple. Conservatives believe in individual liberty and freedom and ambition so that people can become the best they can be, because it is believed that the greatest society and the greatest culture, the greatest country, is achieved by the greatest number of people pursuing excellence. Liberals don’t have that faith in people and they don’t want that kind of freedom. They want to be in charge. They want to have the power and they want people dependent because that is what enriches them in every which way you can imagine.
END TRANSCRIPT
Read the Background Material…
CaptainsQuarters: US Health Care Saves More Lives Than Socialized Medicine
Tagged with: adverse impact • american health care • american health care system • australia canada • avastin • cancer drugs • clinical oncologist • colorectal • colorectal cancer patients • countries with socialized medicine • economic factors • female cancer • health care system • karolinska institute in stockholm • new drugs • new medicines • oncology drugs • patient survival • survivability rates • total population
Filed under: Colorectal Cancer


People in socialized medicine countries come here to have living related donor kidney transplants.
So do we applaud? Throw money? What?
The American health care system only outperforms for you if you have enough money to buy health insurance and see a doctor. Ask a child with poor parents how well the American system works for him. Maybe if you ever were poor and had to choose between getting groceries or going to the doctor, you would understand why so many people want socialized medicine.
Another cut and paste from a right-wing partisan website. Do yourself a favor and just include the link man.
that only talks about cancer patients with care the way I read it? yet you say it saves more lives overall? which you don’t bother to prove in any way… typical
what about the ones that don’t have insurance in every field?
oh, that would blow your little story completely out of the water if you included everyone, as everyone is included in socialist nations…
there are studies that look at the overall issues… it’s not nearly as pretty of a picture…
Yeah, and WHO pays for these new million dollar drugs? Health insurance has gone through the roof, not to mention the tax payers paying for illegal aliens.
You need to have MONEY to be able to get these drugs!
The issue isn’t the health care it is health INSURANCE. that is the issue.
It makes no sense to have the best health care in the world when 15% of your population can not afford it.
Countries with socialized medicine are going broke. They are also rationing medical care. smokers who have lung problems are put at the bottom of the list because it is deemed to be their fault because they smoked.people with liver problems & are deemed to be heavy drinkers are also put on the bottom of the list.I have been to the hospital & paid nothing because I was not insured. Evey hospital has a fund that pays for indignent people. They just dsont tell you about it untill you ask. My local hospital has atleast 3 million in this fund. They payed $26,000 for me after I told them I could pay $10 a month.
Socialized medicine is crap. I pay 466 dollars a month for the best healthcare money can buy. I plan to keep it that way. If you want food healthcare it’s simple…Get a good job, utilize the benefits they provide and viola, good healthcare. Straight to the front of the line. No physicians Assistants, no interns. Just Doctors who know what the hell there doing. It’s not my fault people have kids they can’t afford.
American healthcare system life expectacy are closer to Mexico than Sweden or Japan. Preventive medicine needs to empathized more than hi tech medicine as delivery system to improve broad population healthcare outcomes. The goverment, and private insurance system needs tranpracey in healthcare records. Healthcare is a humanright, and costs people over 50 years old $600 to $1000 a month for healthcare coverage in America, and you lose a job end up with no insurnace. The best policy would allow people if they want goverment coverage they would pay a higher medicare tax rate, and if they want private coverage they pay lower medicare tax rate. People can have both coverage or one, but to leave people uncovered drives up insurnace costs for all payers. Corporations have to cut healthcare benefits each year because of inflation of healthcare costs, and those are passed on as lower wages for the workers. Trans Am may talk about cancer, but what about diabetes, mental illness, obesity, heart disease. Socialized medicine like Canada is not what the average American wants, but the present we have now is total mess.
You are very wrong. It is not about control. It is about affording the treatments. The question that study doesn’t answer is "who pays for the medicine" In the US it is either insurance or they can’t afford the medicine. Many people in the US can’t afford to have any treatments.
Myself I pay an extremely high premium for my insurance so that I can have medicine and treatments for my heart. If insurance gets much higher, I will have to reevaluate my options of how to pay my pacemaker/defibrillator which I can’t afford the costs of myself.
If socialized medicine comes to the US, I will pay far less, doctors will get the same amount of money, and everyone will be able to afford the cost of it. It is the insurance companies that are threatened. They would take a huge profit loss.
If my condition worsens there are only three way I will be alive in 20 years: 1) socialized health care 2) a job with health benefits that are required to pick up prior conditions, chancy at best to find one, 3) a liberal group takes pity on me and picks up the costs.
I’m sorry if I can’t agree with your views, but I would like to live.
Don’t know much about the American health system but I have a feeling from what I have read that if you don’t have private health insurance you are pretty much on your own and relying on a system that doesn’t offer much. Please correct me if I am wrong.
My guess is that your system is great for a large proportion of your population whereas social systems at least give hope to all it’s people.
Can’t find any reference in any Kolinska report that they are comparing universal health systems but maybe you could point me to where they make this reference.