Since 1970, has anyone in the USA really died because they couldn’t afford health care?
I’m looking for citations and references here, folks, not anecdotal heresay.
And one more thing: Dying because nobody’s developed a cure for cancer doesn’t count (so don’t even go there). :rolleyes:
I’m talking about has anyone in the USA since 1970 really died – OF SOMETHING CURABLE – had they only been able to afford reasonable health care coverage?
No references, no citations, than go home. Leave the kool-aid at the door. I want to be linked to something real here, folks.
You can read the story there, but basically, Driver got an infected tooth, and because of, first, his mother’s jobs not providing dental insurance, and then after she lost her jobs, various circumstances with Medicare eligibility, his mother wasn’t able to get a dentist to treat him. The infection spread to his brain and he died.
The key to searching is “preventable deaths”.
They’re not hard to find in years after the advent of the internet, but you’ll likely have to comb newspaper morgues to get at 1970.
I sympathize with your question and what I guess is your intent and stuff, but in actual fact, there are many more “cures” for cancer now than there used to be, which are only available to those who can afford health care. I’ve now survived two different kinds of cancer that, if I lived in a third-world country, would have killed me by now, and if I hadn’t had insurance in this country would have bankrupted me if I could have been cleared to get care at all. Seriously. Very seriously. I am dead serious.
Though if I really was born and raised in a third-world country, I would probably have died of asthma, pneumonia, and maybe the concussion I had long before I ever lived long enough to get cancer (twice). Sure, in the US I might have been given care for those things. But maybe not. Many people who can’t afford health care don’t try to get it, even if they could get it on charity.
ETA: I was born in 1969, and all my health issues happened well after 1970.
I haven’t read the whole thing but the abstract has this:
Results: France has the lowest mortality rates. The US exhibits higher total, but similar AM rates compared to England and Wales. Rates of AM are lowest in Paris and highest in London. Avoidable mortality rates are higher in poor neighbourhoods of all three cities; only in Manhattan is there a correlation between the percentage of deaths that are avoidable and an income related variable.
So there is a relationship between poverty and avoidable mortality rates.
The US “War on Poverty,” civil rights legislation, and the establishment of Medicare occurred in the mid 1960s, which were intended to reduce socioeconomic and racial/ethnic inequalities and improve access to health care. In the 1980s there was a general cutting back of welfare state provisions in America, which included cuts to public health and antipoverty programs, tax relief for the wealthy, and worsening inequity in the access to and quality of health care. Together, these wider events could explain the fall then rise trends in mortality disparities.
Again, a possible correlation between poverty (inability to pay for healthcare) and avoidable mortality.
All the time. But right there in the ER? Rarely. Usually, it’s years later when they did not get the kind of expensive long term treatment that keeps people well and/or alive.
Inferential, but 60% of bankruptcy filings are due to medical bills. The idea that these same illnesses don’t affect those with even less means is beyond the realm of possibility. (Of course, the destitute might have done better because they qualify for Medicaid, at which point one might also note that the House reform proposal, at least, raises the threshold for Medicaid eligibility.)
Another fact worth noting – a week or two ago there was a health clinic for free medical screenings and dental care out in L.A. Thousands showed up, because they couldn’t afford the testing otherwise. That is an unacceptable result even if it didn’t lead to avoidable deaths. But of course it does, because similarly situated people who don’t live in L.A. (or who couldn’t leave work that day) didn’t get their screenings, and so some of them have additional untreated illnesses.
Take a look at a Google search here for died “couldn’t afford” chemotherapy. After taking a look at some of the hits, try substituting “chemotherapy” with “diabetes” “medicine”, etc.
I like to think of myself as a skeptical person - I don’t take a lot on faith, and often don’t accept anecdotal evidence as proof, whatever side of the political spectrum it’s coming from. However, the fundamental arrogance and callousness of your question appalls me. Your question seems completely ignorant of the basic issue at the core of the health care debate: if one has a treatable condition, one must be able to afford the treatment. Is this lost on you, or are you just accepting that someone will pay, just as long as it’s not you?
Ultimately, the problem is that we’re talking about an issue that mostly affects poor people. Unless they happen to be lucky enough to survive a potentially fatal condition, the issue goes under-reported. And if they do survive, you can sit there and say “see? I told you so - why do they need health care?”
We have among the worst life expectancy and infant mortality rates in the industrialized world - and what separates us from most of those countries (especially Western and Northern Europe, which leads most health statistics) is a robust public health-care option. If you want to ask for cites, well, do something that most folks opposing health care reform refuse to do. Educate yourself by looking at the raw numbers: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/2/38980580.pdf.
35 out of 195 in life expectancy, however, only 15 nations have a significantly higher life expectancy.
33 out of 195 for infant mortality.
The other things that separates us is a large continuous flow of immigrants (mostly undocumented) from nations with a much poorer infant mortality & life expectancy. (El Salvador being 99 and Mexico being 80 in infant mortality.)
And in theory, all Mexicans are entitled to receive medical care by the state.
There are little details on the health care systems of quite a few nations higher than the USA, such as the Czech Republic, Hong Kong (although China itself has horrible stats), South Korea, and etc.
Yes, the Western European nations have better stats. Note also that nations that do very wel in both categories have a very low birth rate, in general. So, maybe it’s Birth rate that effects life expectancy and infant mortality.
I seriously doubt we’ll ever see or hear from shallora again, but if we do, I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts it will be a similarly themed rant, possibly comparing health care with the cash for clunkers program.
Too bad that. I’d like to hear his version of the mechanism whereby all people who do not get healthcare for things both fatal and curable, somehow get better anyway.
If it turns out to be practical, the nation could save a lot of lives and money by only treating incurable illnesses, and letting the curable ones recover on their own.
Now that I think on it, we might as well not treat the incurable either, since they’re just going to die anyway. That’s even more savings for you and I!
I was talking to a friend of mine who is currently a medical student at Johns Hopkins and is from a family of doctors and scientists. He told me that among the medical community, the belief is that one of the biggest projected increases in healthcare in the future is going to be people needing treatment for diabetes. He says with the current rates of obesity in America, there is going to be a gigantic wave of people suffering from diabetes in fifteen years or so, and according to him, any taxpayer-funded health care system is going to be unable to shoulder this burden. He says this is because diabetes is a condition that one has to live with over the long term, rather than a one-shot cure-it-or-it-kills-you illness. He says it is going to be a gigantic drain on health care.
Personally I think people who develop health problems connected to obesity are basically committing suicide. Whether you can afford health care or not, if you die because of an obesity-related issue, you killed yourself.