SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
"A former soldier cut off two of his gangrene-ridden toes with a pair of tin metal pliers without anesthetic in his living room after becoming frustrated at a six-week delay to being operated on by the National Health Service (NHS)."
[...] "He says he eventually developed gangrene and his doctor said his infected toes would have to be removed. Rather than wait six weeks for the operation, Dibbins took matters into his own hands.
He says the operation, performed without pain killers and in his living room while biting on a rolled up towel, took about an hour. His wife of 40 years was in the house but says she did not want to look.
“Knowing that it would take at least another six weeks to get me in front of a surgeon again, that’s when I bit the bullet and cut off the toes,” Dibbins told the North Devon Journal.
“I did it because it’s what had to be done. My doctor told me my toes were going to kill me."
https://www.rt.com/uk/364152-gangrene-frostbite-toes-cut/
(Score: 4, Interesting) by naubol on Saturday October 29 2016, @11:29PM
I found some data that does say NHS went from 3.5% from 1960 to 7.2% in 08. http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/dhtml_slides/10/blastland/img/slide3_v4.gif [bbc.co.uk]
For the US, health spending went from 4.5% in 1960 to 17.8% in 2010. https://econographics.wordpress.com/2012/09/28/u-s-healthcare-spending-as-percentage-of-gdp/ [wordpress.com]
It seems difficult to assert that this means the approach is wrong. The UK held costs down much better!
(Score: 3, Informative) by edIII on Saturday October 29 2016, @11:39PM
Do NOT compare any health system to the one in the U.S on a financial basis. We have the most hell bound pyschotic avaricious parasites in the world. THAT's why a fucking 2c band-aid costs $4.99 a piece and an Aspirin can cost $30.
When you compare our costs against Cuba's costs for the same medicine, keeping in mind they're under a nasty double embargo, the U.S is TWO orders of magnitude higher. We're the fucking assholes that sell $2 worth of epinephrine for $600.
Probably better off comparing the UK against Canada or some other country that is in the top 10 for medicine. The U.S? Not anywhere near the top 20 even. We're the greatest though right? ;)
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by naubol on Sunday October 30 2016, @01:24AM
So, don't compare a single payer approach with a market approach because the market approach is unfair due to avaricious pricing? That was sort of the point of my post. :p
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @04:49AM
The "market approach" ... excuse me while I laugh so hard I cough up a lung.
The "market approach" - where the government decides who can decide which universities may graduate how many doctors.
The "market approach" - where the government deliberately puts monopolies in place and refuses to do anything about them when they're abused.
The "market approach" - where the government's sweetheart agencies and programmes can extract non-negotiable services at non-negotiable (and wildly uneconomical) rates and leave everyone else to pick up the slack as a hidden tax.
The "market approach" - where participation is mandatory, backed with fines, and they can't even get insurers to make a profit with a captive audience more comprehensive than drivers' insurance policies have.
The "market approach" - where actual pricing information is carefully hidden, varies wildly between customers, and is most definitely not open to bid or negotiation except where the counterparty is a large institution, or would otherwise simply default on payment.
The "market approach" - with multiple, parallel, substantial single-payer operations in it.
If the USA's approach is anything like a market-based approach, then maybe we need to give anarchy another try.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @11:45PM
Apples and oranges.
But even assuming those numbers are utterly comparable on every level (they're not, but what the hell ...) that mostly reveals that when you have a market strongly constrained by a buyer with the force of law, you're apt not to get a lot of price rises.
The situation in the USA actually fostered a whole series of abuses.