Health Care Around the World
It’s been a while since I wrote about my favorite topic. But now, Jonathan Cohn discusses an interesting PBS documentary on comparative health care systems across the world. Unlike Sicko, the tone is sober, and it doesn’t include Cuba in its list of comparators! It also does not avoid the problems that these countries face with their health care systems. Still, the bottom line is clear: “Every system the film portrays has its problems, but overall each one seems to deliver a better total package than the one in the U.S.”
Taiwan is an interesting case, as it presents a unique natural experiment: it switched from a US-style system to a single payer system a few years ago. It proved a major success, leading to better and cheaper health care, and proved immensely popular. What’s more:
“There are no chronic waiting lists, like you find in Britain, and the care is very advanced. Among other things, Taiwan is among the world leaders in establishing electronic medical records–an innovation that should significantly improve care by keeping doctors and nurses better informed about patient histories and, no less important, avoiding potentially dangerous drug interactions.”
The US can learn from other countries too:
“The reports from Germany, Japan, and Switzerland make it clear that it’s possible to have everything Americans like about their health care system–quick access, choice of doctor and provider, high quality care–while covering everybody and spending less. The film also does an admirable job of pointing out the virtues of a system like England’s, which may be too spartan for American tastes but nevertheless has been a true innovator when it comes to encouraging quality and cost-effective spending.”
It is well known that Americans pay more than twice as much for health care as the average European country, with worse outcomes, and huge rationing by cost. The problem, of course, is that the health care debate is not marked by sober fact-based discussions. It is driven by ideology and anecdotes: if the government is involved, it must be worse, and anyway, aren’t Canadians streaming across the border to get into US hospitals? It’s time to follow the example of this documentary.
Comments are closed.
His bias shines though but it was an interesting documentary nonetheless. I dunno if he cherry-picked the countries he thought would best make his case, but it’s a shame that he didn’t look at consumer-driven universal health care systems. By cutting out the middle-man (insurance companies), Singapore spends less per GDP than any of the nations including in that doc while still ranking above all of them. And yet the system is more private than the US!
The problem, of course, is that the health care debate is not marked by sober fact-based discussions. It is driven by ideology and anecdotes:
That’s the only part of this post with which I agree.
Well, maybe not only. Should have said especially, but it is getting late.
There were two other interesting observations in the documentary:
“America doesn’t have a health system, we have a health economy.”
And, the observation that the United States already has elements of some of the other five systems, so they’re not as foreign as we may think they are. If you’re a veteran in the US, your health care is like Britain’s NHS, if you’re a senior citizen, your health care is like Taiwan’s system, if you’re one of the working insured, your health care is like Germany’s. It’s when you’re one of the poor and uninsured, and your health care is like many of the poorest countries in the world.
Now, that very last part may be a bit of stretch; having lived in Malawi, I can tell you how really terrible health care can be. But I think the point is there that the richest nation in the world, which spends more than any other nation on health care, shouldn’t have 47 million people unable to attain basic and preventative health care. And his point is that health care reform can be done, even in wealthy free-market economies.
If anyone’s interested, this coming week is Cover the Uninsured Week. http://covertheuninsured.org/
The Catholic Health Association has a good “Vision for U.S. Health Care” that some might wish to look at: http://www.chausa.org/Pub/MainNav/ourcommitments/healthreform/
And at the Kaiser Family Foundation you can get a side by side comparison of the three candidates’ proposals for health reform: http://www.health08.org/sidebyside_results.cfm?c=5&c=11&c=16
(I just tried posting this comment, but apparently it didn’t stick. If this gets posted twice, can a moderator delete this?)
There were two other interesting observations in the documentary:
“America doesn’t have a health system, we have a health economy.”
And, the observation that the United States already has elements of some of the other five systems, so they’re not as foreign as we may think they are. If you’re a veteran in the US, your health care is like Britain’s NHS, if you’re a senior citizen, your health care is like Taiwan’s system, if you’re one of the working insured, your health care is like Germany’s. It’s when you’re one of the poor and uninsured, and your health care is like many of the poorest countries in the world.
Now, that very last part may be a bit of stretch; having lived in Malawi, I can tell you how really terrible health care can be. But I think the point is there that the richest nation in the world, which spends more than any other nation on health care, shouldn’t have 47 million people unable to attain basic and preventative health care. And his point is that health care reform can be done, even in wealthy free-market economies.
If anyone’s interested, this coming week is Cover the Uninsured Week. http://covertheuninsured.org/
The Catholic Health Association has a good “Vision for U.S. Health Care” that some might wish to look at: http://www.chausa.org/Pub/MainNav/ourcommitments/healthreform/
And at the Kaiser Family Foundation you can get a side by side comparison of the three candidates’ proposals for health reform: http://www.health08.org/sidebyside_results.cfm?c=5&c=11&c=16