tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8817171247555815363.post1544877974326299236..comments2024-03-26T05:57:44.937+00:00Comments on True Economics: Economics 29/09/2009: Socialism is Bad for Your HealthTrueEconomicshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07350536454228478974noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8817171247555815363.post-53579125167663038692009-10-01T22:48:16.962+01:002009-10-01T22:48:16.962+01:00I'm not sure your conclusion is supported by t...I'm not sure your conclusion is supported by the study, and certainly not by the facts that you highlight. The study simply says that the Beveridge model based health care systems have a lower score on this scale, in general, than those based on the Bismark model. It says nothing about "socialised medicine", unless, being generous, that is your short-hand for Beveridge, though I'd hardly say that is what the "Irish left" rants about. The Irish left rants about keeping the status quo where the system is intentionally run for the benefit of those working in it, not for patients. <br /><br />But more importantly, this study does not say Beveridge systems are bad for your health. The study was designed to measure how consumer friendly the system is, not how effective it is except in as much as this affects consumer friendliness. I haven't looked at the weighting of the various factors in the score, but I think it allows for a system to score well where the patient dies, so long as he got to read a bill of rights first, and only had to wait a short time to receive the treatment that killed him. I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm far off on that, but in my world view, outcomes are the only consumer friendliness factor that should really matter. Unless the scores are weighted very heavily on the outcome axis, I don't consider these results useful.<br /><br />Finally, the examples you called out do not make your point, and this is where I take the most exception, but only because I don't want the looneys in the current US debate to gain succour from your analysis (or succor as they would take it). You're sounding like Fox News here! <br /><br />Outcomes are better in Canada than in most places in Europe. Certainly you are better off in Canada's system than in Ireland's, if by better off you are concerned with health care outcomes rather than dross like patient's bills of rights.<br /><br />For a more detailed examination of 5 year cancer survival rates, see the CONCORD study published in the Lancet last year, and summarized here (for Canada) <a rel="nofollow">http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=d18a477c-2d4b-4d33-90c2-25f9f838c6c9</a>, and here (for Ireland): <a rel="nofollow">http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ireland-trails-world-in-cancer-survival-1435051.html</a>. To repeat the headlines from those linked articles: <b>"Canada's cancer survival rates among best in world: study"</b> and <b>"Ireland trails world in cancer survival"</b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com