A lazy tired blogger steals borrows from Sharon again

Not really a surprise, at least not to conservatives:

I’ve Been Telling You This

U.S. has the best health care.

As recently published by Investor Business Daily, a survey by the U.N. International Health Organization has reported:

Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis: U.S. 65 percent, Eng-land 46 percent, Canada 42 percent.

Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months: U.S. 93 percent, England 15 percent, Canada 43 percent.

Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months: U.S. 90 percent, England 15 percent, Canada 43 percent.

Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month: U.S. 77 percent, England 40 percent, Canada 43 percent.

Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people: U.S. 71, England 14, Canada 18.

Percentage of seniors (65 and older) with low income who say they are in “excellent health”: U.S. 12 percent, England 2 percent, Canada 6 percent.
The initial conclusion from this report is that the U.S. has the best health care in the world.

Well, duh.

I’ve noted before the extensive waiting times to get some diagnostic tests in our good neighbor to the north, while here we actually have doctors and clinics advertising for patients to use their MRI machine. We have the machines, and really excess capacity, while the socialized medicine countries — the ones which have removed the profit motive as much as they can — have shortages.

The International Monetary Fund lists the United States as sixth in the world in per capita GDP, at $46,443 per person. The same list has Canada twelfth, with a per capita GDP of $38,290. A significant difference, to be sure, but Canada is clearly a wealthy country.

The Census Bureau lists our current population at about 308,700,000 souls. The current population of Canada is 34,004,000. Since Sharon gave us the number of MRI machines per million population, some simple math tells us that there are roughly 21,920 MRI machines in the US, and 612 in Canada. Why is it that, in socially-concerned, socially-caring Canada, the government-run health system could only buy — or only chose to buy — slightly over 600 MRI machines, when such devices are within the reach of private clinics in the United States?


  1. But Dana/Sharon, you’re letting facts get in the way of something that is for our own good whether we know it or not. Remember, Progressives are at their best when they have experts controlling everything for you. That way you don’t have those silly details bothering you, they will put it all on a computer and let the computer decide your treatment and life expectancy. Remember, the sooner you die, the more money for younger productive proles.

  2. More from our “friends” to the North on Health Care


    Doctors back ‘right to die’

    Consultation; But MDs oppose assisted suicide

    By KEVIN DOUGHERTY, The GazetteFebruary 16, 2010Comments (132)

    Euthanasia is already a reality in Quebec hospitals, the president of the federation of Quebec medical specialists, told a National Assembly committee yesterday.
    Doctors know when death is “imminent and inevitable,” Gaétan Barrette explained.

    But doctors are aware they can be charged with murder if they administer a “palliative sedative” before a patient is on his or her last breath.

    Geoffrey Kelley, chairman of the committee, explained that MNAs will hear about 30 expert witnesses on “dying with dignity” to prepare a paper for a travelling public consultation this fall.

    Barrette told the committee the issue of euthanasia could not be discussed in Quebec 50 years ago, comparing it with the evolution in thinking about abortion.

    “Doctors are ready to debate euthanasia,” Barrette said. And like abortion, he said, limits must be established. Not every patient will want euthanasia and not all doctors will agree to perform the procedure.

    Barrette explained that a patient who is lucid consults with a doctor, friends and family members before requesting euthanasia.

    For patients who are not lucid, a biological will can guide relatives who must decide.

    The patient could have a terminal disease, like cancer. And patients at the “end of life” could be babies born with serious medical difficulties or seniors whose bodies are shutting down, one system after another.
    But wait, there’s more!

    Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Doctors+back+right/2568891/story.html#ixzz0flNCF97B

  3. First of all, please note that neither Sharon nor Investors Business Daily gave us a link to this report. I find that highly suspicious.

    Second, assuming such a survey really exists, I suspect that there has been some vigorous cherry picking here, because the US is listed 37th in terms of the quality of outcomes.

    Here is what Brian Anderson has to say about this:

    There is no United Nations International Health Organization and I cannot find any article in the Investors Business Daily that comes anywhere close to siting these numbers. These are probably fiction. Investors Business Daily is famous for saying that Stephen Hawking would be dead if he lived in England, which he does: google it and their reaction. They also published bogus polls numbers regarding doctors support of health care reform” Google that as well.

    This is all bull

    Please supply the link to the original study if it exists, otherwise I am very skeptical about this report.

  4. Sharon’s “source” is a letter to the editor citinmg unconfirmed factoids from an unidentified report. If I was marking it academically, she’d definitely lose a point right there.

    Checking snopes, we see this comment

    The Investor’s Business Daily has no article with this data.

    There is no such entity as the United Nation’s ‘International’ Health Organization. Presumably the author was attempting to claim the source of the ‘data’ came from the U.N.’s WORLD Health Organization.

    None of these statistics can be gathered from the data on the WHO’s website. Especially something as specific as a hip replacement.

    The data is seemingly in direct conflict with data on the WHO website/survey.

    Once again we see wingnuts spreading misinformation. Once again, we point out that it has no tracable basis in fact.

    Once again it will continue to be spread.

  5. Yorktown: “The patient could have a terminal disease, like cancer. And patients at the “end of life” could be babies born with serious medical difficulties or seniors whose bodies are shutting down, one system after another.”

    I cannot think of a human right more sacred than one in which a person has the right to determine if and when to end their own life.

    This decision is a matter of personal choice, therefore is not the business of the state, of insurance companies, of family members, or of friends.

    A medical power of attorney works for folks who become incapacitated, leaving it to some designated person the power to carry out his/her wishes. It is for those who are not incapacitated who are not appropriately cared for in this regard.

    We need to bring this topic up for debate, with the goal of freeing individuals to make their own life decisions, in such a way as to provide a dignified way to carry out their wishes.

    I fully understand how difficult a topic this is, but it is past time that we must deal with it once and for all.

  6. Phoenician: “Betcha Sharon doesn’t acknowledge on her blog the teeny tiny minor problem that both the article and organisation cited don’t exist.”

    So far, you are winning your bet!

  7. If Perry, Nangleator and Pho are correct you (and we) need to reconsider both Sharon and IBD as sources. I like to win but I like to do it with common sense and above all, the truth.

  8. Hey, Perry – it looks like Sharon deleted the comment on your blog where you pointed out her story was full of shit. Not only is she not intellectually honest enough to own up to it, she actively goes out of her way to censor out anybody pointing out that it’s a lie.

    Well done that wingnut.

  9. Before she deleted it, she admitted that it was a “fake”, but then said the allegations were true anyway. I asked her to prove it. Then pffft, gone! No proof given. So yes, her credibility is in question!

    Update: Now Sharon has restored it. What’s going on?

  10. Perry, she admitted nothing. She played your blind partisanship against you, referencing a now-defrocked high priest of lamestream media in her comment. But this is the major point everyone who is not a liberal will agree with (and every liberal, with the possible exception of Jeff, will lie and deny):

    Perry, you don’t believe stuff with documentation. Let it drop.
    Sharon | 02.17.10 – 9:10 pm |

  11. John H.

    If you and Sharon refuse to recognize an outright lie, as has been demonstrated to you, that’s on you two!

    Sharon’s final statement is nothing more than a cop-out. It has to do with integrity, or lack thereof.

Comments are closed.