The warning sirens are blaring, but will we listen? Centralized health care planning doesn’t work. In the UK, the NHS hospitals have an abysmal record on something as basic as hygiene. From the story:
A quarter of health trusts failed to meet standards over hospital infections while five were warned over blood-spattered walls and mouldy instruments under a toughened regulatory regime, the Guardian has learned. Of particular concern was the state of ambulances, which were inspected for the first time. Investigators found dirty forceps stored in some vehicles as well as bloodstains…
The reasons for failure were worrying: 36 trusts were not providing areas to decontaminate instruments; in three trusts there was a failure to regularly flush unused water outlets – crucial for the control of legionella infections; and 13 trusts were criticised for not keeping clinical areas clean. Nigel Ellis, the CQC’s head of national inspection, said: “Good infection control takes constant vigilance – and meeting that every day, for every patient, is an ongoing challenge for the NHS. “We have found evidence of a direct risk to patients and have intervened using our new enforcement powers to ensure swift improvements were made.”
I am tempted to profanity. I am a writer–and a lawyer–word usually do not fail me. But I am at a loss…
In the USA, we have the Joint Committee–a private accrediting organizations the inspections of which are stringent and thorough. We have federal oversight, state departments of health, and lawyers ready to sue at the drop of a hat, etc.,, all of which work together to keep our hospitals generally on the up and up. But you accept centralized planning–which is where Obamacare is intended to take us eventually–and you get the NHS.
March 16th, 2010 | 11:53 pm
Health Care Hysteria!!
Why would you attempt to link the UK NHS to US health care reform? There has been no proposal to my knowledge for socialized medicine in the US like that in Britain. You do realize that in Britain almost all medical personnel and facilities are government owned and operated?
Even with your hysteria it remains that the life expectancy at birth for Brits is 79 yrs, and in the US 78 yrs. In fact citizens of “socialist” medicine nations, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bermuda, Bosnia, Canada, Cayman Islands, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Guernsey, Hong Kong, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jersey, Jordan, S. Korea, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macau, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, Virgin Islands all live longer than Americans. Puerto Ricans, who are American citizens, live longer than mainland Americans. Puerto Rico also has universal health care administered by the government.
Oh. Those other countries where people are healthier than Americans, live longer and where ALL citizens have access to quality healthcare, on average spend about 1/2 per person as we do.
March 17th, 2010 | 8:41 am
Jeffery,
That’s a selective look at statistics, you so often accuse Wesley of not doing his homework, yet you are fixated on a number (life expectancy) that is not directly related to hospital care in many circumstances. Besides, comparing the Channel Islands to the United States is like saying whatever works for the city of Grand Rapids, MI will work for the entire USA… c’mon, Guernsey? Seriously? Perhaps you should look at things such as cancer survival rates, and then get back to us with your findings.
There have been repeated calls for socialized medicine in this country for decades and decades. Your entire post is essentially arguing we should have socialized medicine! You can’t myopically look at the language of this bill and then ignore the broader implications and long-term road it’s taking us down.
It’s funny that the CQC directly points out the poor quality of many NHS hospitals, yet you repeat the maxim that all citizens have access to “quality” care.
Health Care Sophistry!! :)
March 17th, 2010 | 9:00 am
I hear the same thing from the personnel in my
congresswoman’s office. Please, Wesley Smith, would you counter Jeffrey’s post for the benefit of us all? It does not square with the statistics on cancer survival 5 years after diagnosis [published by the UNIHO and reported recently in Investor's
Business Daily: US=65%, UK=46%,Canada=42%]
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
March 17th, 2010 at 9:56 am
Anyone who wants my views on issues not germane to the post can do a search of post I have written previously.
March 17th, 2010 | 12:17 pm
Our cancer survival rates are higher.
And our infant mortality rates are higher because we count all babies born alive who then die. You list countries that reclassify some as “stillbirths.”
March 17th, 2010 | 2:59 pm
Wesley squealed hysterically about the UK NHS which is irrelevant to the any proposal in the US. I squealed back about life expectancy. Neither statistic is in and of itself tells the whole story.
All those other nations (and in fact the European Union has more citizens and higher GDP than the US) deliver better health care for 1/2 what we pay. Call the health care systems of other nations names if you it makes you feel better. But they work.
Is the current bill the answer. Sadly, No!
Will anyone please define “socialized medicine”? Is Medicare socialized medicine? It’s similar to what’s found in France and Switzerland. Would you like to dismantle Medicare so that seniors could enjoy the benefits of private insurance?
Is there any change to our current health care system that conservatives would want to make? Tort reform? Will cut costs less than 1% according to the CBO.
Mary, Some of our cancer survival stats are better. I’ve heard your infant mortality argument before in conservative blogs and don’t believe it. Please show how the US assesses infant mortality differently.
March 17th, 2010 | 3:47 pm
Will anyone please define “socialized medicine”? Is Medicare socialized medicine? It’s similar to what’s found in France and Switzerland. Would you like to dismantle Medicare so that seniors could enjoy the benefits of private insurance?
Um, yes? The staggering numbers of seniors (the richest group of Americans, by far) would crater the cost of insurance for *everyone* and also take away the monstrous trainwreck that will be Medicare in the near-future.
Any other ‘brilliant’ questions?
March 18th, 2010 | 7:25 pm
Eliminate Medicare. Add this 10% of newly uninsured policyholders (all 65 and older) to private insurance rolls so that insurance premiums will “crater”. That’s your “brilliant” plan?
You packed a lot of misinformation in a single sentence. Perhaps a record, but I don’t know who monitors these things.
March 19th, 2010 | 8:09 pm
More hysterical BS about “socialized medicine” and more irrelevant comparisons of health care in the US and the UK. When will it end? Maybe this weekend?
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
March 19th, 2010 at 9:18 pm
No. If it passes, the stories out of the UK and Canada will be even more important.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact