(scroll down for German)

Does privatization of health care system pay off in terms of:

cost-effectiveness/efficiency/better quality of service for the patience – or is it yet another privatization-trap?

Where costs go up and quality goes (even further) down?

A Lesson from Canada: – if you want to increase inequality: keep going!

The pain is massive in the Brittish/English health system:

and it also starts to grow in other European countries – especially those with harsh austerity meassures (Greece, France but Germany also where privatization of health care is in full throttle with e.g. investors buying private practices as an crisis secure investment or US-Mars buying 2000 pet health care doctor pracices and now also goes shopping in Europe)

“University city the British on: A senior doctor has announced there, chemotherapy treatments for cancer patients would have to be rationed because the hospital has too few qualified nurses” …

“The news also struck the death of a senior citizen in the English seaside resort of Clacton, who died last week after having to wait four hours for an emergency ambulance at her home.” On New Year’s Day, a patient who had suffered a stroke in the city of Portsmouth had to stand for seven hours Another patient reported a gynecological examination on a crowded hospital corridor on the BBC because no room was available. ”

“The NHS, founded 70 years ago and” free “for patients, is considered by millions of Britons, despite its weaknesses, to be the proudest achievement of their welfare state” …

“In light of disaster reports from hospitals” (chronically underfunded as in Cuba XD) “, a debate has begun on reforms that would be virtually revolutionary for Britain: the introduction of an” NHS tax “, the proceeds of which will be used to finance health care only. In fact, this would be a change of system – away from tax financing, towards a contributory state health insurance. ” …

“It is largely undisputed among experts that the huge health service, which is one of the largest employers in the world with around 1.5 million employees, not only needs to become more efficient, but also needs more money.” …

The British model would thus still be similar to the highly controversial “Citizens’ Insurance”, for the introduction of which in this country, the SPD has advertised in the explorations with the Union parties. The Social Democrats want to oblige all citizens to join such a unitary insurance. …

“The hard state austerity measures in the United Kingdom in recent years has left deep marks, not least in the health care system.” …

“In terms of infant mortality, the UK has fallen from seventh to 19th place in the EU in 25 years, 40 percent fewer nurses and 30 percent fewer doctors than in Germany.

This is also due to the fact that too few specialists were trained for cost reasons. Healthcare spending is a quarter lower than in Germany. If you can afford it, you can get private health insurance, but nine out of every ten Britons rely on the NHS alone. ”

AutoTranslated from Source: https://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/die-britische-einheitsversicherung-als-negativbeispiel-fuer-deutschland-15388429.html

What about US and Canada?

“In 1972 the Yukon Territory became the last jurisdiction in Canada to adopt the Medical Care Act, which set up a system to provide hospital and physician care to all Canadians. Before then, the Canadian and US health care systems were similar. Both were partly public, partly private, partly for profit and partly nonprofit. Both also left a great many citizens uninsured

The costs were also about the same — a little over $300 per person in 1970 — as were outcomes. At that time, life expectancy was about a year longer in the United States.

But with the implementation of Canadian medicare, the 2 systems rapidly began to diverge in all respects.”

The US (health care) system became more and more costly, leaving increasing numbers of Americans — now about 46 million people (15%) — uninsured.

In 2005, expenditures were twice as high in the US as in Canada — US$6697 per person v. US$3326 in Canada.3

37% of Americans reported that they went without needed care because of cost, compared with 12% of Canadians.

life expectancy of Americans is now 2.5 years shorter than that of Canadians.  …

contrary to popular belief, people in the US do not receive more health care services. They visit their doctors much less often and spend less time in hospital than Canadians do (Table 1). Per population, there are also fewer nurses and hospital beds in the US, although there are slightly more doctors and many more magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) units.,

“health care is distributed not according to medical need but, rather, according to the ability to pay”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2565716/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health

John Dingell Kept the Faith, From the New Deal to ‘Medicare for All’

The veteran congressman, who has died at age 92, always understood that health care is a right.

src: https://www.thenation.com/article/john-dingell-obit-medicare-for-all/

Privatisierung des Deutschen Gesundheitssystems: (nicht nur Krankenkassen, sondern auch Krankenhäuser und Arztpraxen)

rentiert es sich? Gesellschaftlich? Wird es günstiger und die Servicequalität besser?

Oder handelt es sich um eine weitere Privatisierungsfalle? (Mit steigenden Kosten und (noch weiter) sinkender Qualität?)

A Lesson from Canada: – wenn man die Ungleichheit weiter befeuern möchte: weiter so!

15% aller Amerikaner sind nicht krankenversichert.

37% können sich keine ärztliche Behandlung leisten.

Wie sieht es aus in USA und Kanada?

“1972 wurde das Yukon-Territorium das letzte Land in Kanada, in dem das Medical Care Act verabschiedet wurde, mit dem ein System geschaffen wurde, das allen Kanadiern die Versorgung von Krankenhäusern und Ärzten ermöglicht.1

Bis dahin waren die kanadischen und US-amerikanischen Gesundheitssysteme ähnlich teils öffentlich, teils privat, teils gewinnorientiert und teils gemeinnützig, beide haben auch viele Bürger unversichert gelassen

Die Kosten waren ebenfalls ungefähr gleich – etwas mehr als 300 US-Dollar pro Person im Jahr 1970 – und die Ergebnisse.

Zu diesem Zeitpunkt war die Lebenserwartung in den Vereinigten Staaten etwa ein Jahr länger.2

Mit der Einführung der kanadischen Medikamentenentwicklung begannen die beiden Systeme in jeder Hinsicht rasch voneinander zu abweichen.

Das US-amerikanische Gesundheitssystem wurde immer kostspieliger, so dass immer mehr Amerikaner – jetzt etwa 46 Millionen Menschen (15%) – nicht versichert waren.

2005 waren die Ausgaben in den USA doppelt so hoch wie in Kanada – 6697 USD pro Person gegenüber 3326 USD in Kanada.3

37% der Amerikaner gaben an, dass sie aus Kostengründen auf die notwendige Pflege verzichten mussten, verglichen mit 12% der Kanadier.3

Die Lebenserwartung der Amerikaner ist jetzt 2,5 Jahre kürzer als die der Kanadier.2

Entgegen der landläufigen Meinung erhalten die Menschen in den USA nicht mehr Gesundheitsleistungen.

Sie besuchen ihre Ärzte viel seltener und verbringen weniger Zeit im Krankenhaus als Kanadier (Tabelle 1).

Pro Einwohner gibt es in den USA auch weniger Krankenschwestern und Krankenhausbetten, obwohl es etwas mehr Ärzte und viele weitere Magnetresonanztomographen (MRI) gibt.5,7 …

Gesundheitsfürsorge wird nicht nach medizinischem Bedarf, sondern nach Zahlungsfähigkeit behandelt”

AutoTranslated Quelle: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2565716/

D.h. es steht VIEL EQUIPMENT herum welches nicht zum Einsatz kommt – weil es sich die US Bürger gar nicht mehr leisten können.

“SUPER!” X-D

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health

Links:

Cuba’s HealthCare System: governmental – free for all – prevention is cheaper – efficient – WHO 2016 Data – Life Expectancy in Cuba better than USA – UK France Germany

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *