While on the face of it this may be about sport, the subject is really the culture and politics reflected in sport, hence the choice of Great Debates over The Game Room.
To anyone paying even a little attention to both the Olympics and the Paralympics, one country’s position on the Paralympics medal table especially sticks out through its mediocrity.
China, GB and Russia were second, third and forth respectively in the Olympics. In the Paralympics they’re first, second and third. The USA is currently sixth, with Ukraine and Australia also ahead of them.
That the USA isn’t doing as well so far at this Paralympics as it did in Beijing, where it came third overall behind China and Great Britain but ahead of the Ukraine and Australia.
I can’t help but wonder if the US medical “system” which gives least to those who need it most is a factor here. In the US, disabled people have to pour resources into basic care, and might well, for example, have to settle for a less than ideal prosthesis due to lack of funds (either their medical insurance won’t cover it, or there are so many other medical things they have to pay for out of pocket they don’t have the resources to purchase the best prosthesis for themselves). The near-lack of a real social safety net also means that the disabled are more likely to live in dire poverty in the US than in many other places. The result is that a disabled athlete might well be a font of talent and ability but unable to utilize it due to fiscal issues in the US.
Of course, the US is not unique that regard, there are other nations that practice “devil take the hindmost” in regards to their citizenry, but, say,that wouldn’t apply to Australia which might be a factor in why Australia is ahead of the US in the paralymics.
And in 2008, when the USA came in ahead of Australia in the Paralympics, did that mean we had better health care then, but since 2008 it has gone downhill?
Since 2008, and Barack Obama’s election, the health care system has spiraled downwards, out of control, putting millions of our country’s most vulnerable citizens at risk? Is that what your’re saying?
Or… maybe there’s some other explanation for national Paralympics rankings?
Honestly, what does the medical system have to do with how well someone performs in the Paralympics?
Is it medical breakthroughs that allow someone to run faster than someone else? Lack of care that causes someone to stumble the last 5 yards? at most, I can maybe get the slight connection where money hampers selection but the rest?
Well, if there’s someone with the cardiovascular potential to be an Olympic athlete and they get clobbered in a car accident and spend a few years recovering with substandard care, their shot at a Paralympics medal could slip away, whereas someone who gets adequate care has an opportunity to keep up their conditioning…
It’s a possible factor, though I’m not sure how you’d go about demonstrating significance.
Come on, it’s a game. Winning monopoly doesn’t make me a financial genius, and America’s’ medal rankings don’t have anything to do with our culture, politics, health care system, economy, or anything else.
I mean, good for the athletes and all, but their success or lack of it says nothing about the country they came from.
Believe me in the UK if you wand the best prosthesis you have to go private. I would expect that to be the case everywhere. You will get “good enough” (perhaps after waiting a year or two for it) but you get what you pay for…
(However, the good stuff will probably be a tenth of the price it would be in the US, due to relatively few insane medical malpractice lawsuits)
In the UK do you have to go bankrupt spending money on general care? If not, doesn’t that leave you more of your own money to spend on a better prosthesis?
(I’m kidding, but I’m serious. Consider, say, Bryshon Nellum: the guy takes three gunshots to the legs, but he doesn’t wind up in a wheelchair and they don’t have to amputate; no, he promptly received medical care terrific enough for him to bring home an Olympic medal from London. Blind athletes compete in the Paralympics? We’ve got laser surgery, we’ve got corneal transplants…)
If the USA wanted to top the medals table, they have the manpower and wealth to achieve that. But clearly, they aren’t interested enough.
Countries do well in sports that the general public is interested in. Public interest = money (from gate receipts, sponsorship, TV rights and government funding). Money = better training, more people wanting to get into the sport, more opportunities for athletes to train full time, better equipment and on and on.
I have read that TV coverage of the paras in the USA has been pretty much non existant. Contrast that with the UK, which has had wall to wall coverage, equal to that of the Olympics themselves. And not just this year, either. There has been strong interest in the UK for years. So the athletes get more funding, do better than most other countries, benefit from the ‘lack’ of interest from countries like the US, and shoot up the medals table.
It’s not rocket science. And it isn’t a reflection of medical systems so much as sporting systems.
In the UK, they are as popular as the Olympics. The main British paralympians are household names. Tanni Grey-Thomson (former wheelchair racer) has even been made a Baroness and holds a seat in the House of Lords.