Developing World's Parasites, Diseases Enter US

reporter alerts us to a story up at the Wall Street Journal on the increasing prevalance in the US of formerly rare, 3rd-world diseases such as toxocariasis, chagas, and cysticercosis. Health-care legislation pending in the House calls for a full report to Congress about the threat from this cluster of diseases, termed "neglected infections of poverty." "Parasitic infections and other diseases usually associated with the developing world are cropping up with alarming frequency among US poor, especially in states along the US-Mexico border, the rural South, and in Appalachia, according to researchers. Government and private researchers are just beginning to assess the toll of the infections, which are a significant cause of heart disease, seizures and congenital birth defects among black and Hispanic populations. ... 'These are diseases that we know are ten-fold more important than swine flu,' said [one] leading researcher in this field. 'They're on no one's radar.' ... These diseases share a common thread. 'People who live in the suburbs are at very low risk,' Dr. Hotez said. But for the 37 million people in the US who live below the poverty line, he said, 'There is real suffering.'" Update: 08/23 16:55 GMT by KD : The submitter pointed out that the usual "Related" link to the original submission was missing on this story. We are testing a new version of the story editor and this was probably caused by a bug; reported. Here's the original.

Comments

Evil Hollywood plot

[oldhack]

to jack up the rating for House MD. Pathetic, really.

The US isn't all first world.

[girlintraining]

People are surprised by this? Our inner cities are rotting. Our economy is in shambles. People are living squallor and poverty on an unprecidented scale in this country. We're a breeding ground now for all manners of disease, both social and medical.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[timeOday]

Well, half the voters don't even believe in public health. If the carriers of an epidemic are deemed unworthy of health care, the free market solution is to wait until everybody gets it, then treat those with money. Ultimately that costs vastly more than stamping it out in the first place, but at least nobody gets healthcare they didn't deserve, and isn't that the most important thing?

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[couchslug]

"People are living squallor and poverty on an unprecedented scale in this country."

Bullshit. We are not near the poverty levels of the Great Depression, and the impact of poverty is greatly mitigated nowadays.

Our bitter refusal to control our borders ensures the human carriers of "Third World" diseases are free to circulate.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Anonymous Coward]

Lack of government healthcare != able to get help. It simply means that things are more expensive for those without healthcare in the short term if they need it.

No money = unable to get help if no government healthcare.

It's really that simple.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[girlintraining]

Bullshit. We are not near the poverty levels of the Great Depression, and the impact of poverty is greatly mitigated nowadays.

History disagrees with your assessment; We're circling the drain. Sequence of events in the Great Depression:

1. Debt liquidation and distress selling
2. Contraction of the money supply as bank loans are paid off
3. A fall in the level of asset prices
4. A still greater fall in the net worths of business, precipitating bankruptcies
5. A fall in profits
6. A reduction in output, in trade and in employment.
7. Pessimism and loss of confidence
8. Hoarding of money
9. A fall in nominal interest rates and a rise in deflation adjusted interest rates.

Let's compare that with now --

1. Debt liquidation and distress selling
July 2007: loss of confidence by investors in the value of securitized mortgages causes liquidity crisis. (Housing Bubble goes pop)

2. Contraction of the money supply as bank loans are paid off
In January 2008, a tax rebate is introduced as part of a "stimulus package" intended to stimulate consumer spending. But several months later, all economic indicators say that the average consumer used the majority of their tax rebate to pay off debt.

3. A fall in the level of asset prices
Housing bubble has now popped. In September 2008, stock markets around the world crash. The subprime mortgage market drags several banks to their death and liquid assets all but disappear from the market. Retail outlets start to go out of business, even with deep cuts in pricing.

4. A still greater fall in the net worths of business, precipitating bankruptcies
Early in 2009, a series of goverment-funded bailouts are issued to financial and automotive firms. Many businesses close up.

5. A fall in profits
Pretty sure we've passed this point.

6. A reduction in output, in trade and in employment.
National unemployment currently hovers at 9.7%, the highest ever recorded.

7. Pessimism and loss of confidence
Check!

8. Hoarding of money
9. A fall in nominal interest rates and a rise in deflation adjusted interest rates.

This is the last step in the fall of our economy, and so far the interest rate hasn't deflated -- but everything else on this timeline has been met.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[s4m7]

Lack of government healthcare != able to get help.

Right. We all remember Bush's answer to the healthcare crisis: let them go to the emergency room. ER care is significantly more expensive than proper preventive and general practice care.

It simply means that things are more expensive for those without healthcare in the short term if they need it.

Right. 62% of all personal bankruptcies in the U.S. in 2007 were caused by health problems and 78% of those filers had insurance. Citation That doesn't just make things more expensive for those with healthcare, it makes them more expensive for policy holders, anyone who wants a loan, small businesses, investors, and stockholders. And it's not just over the short term, it has an overall detrimental effect on our nation's economic well being which continues to mount.

In general there are a lot of "reactionary" people here in the US who will go to the doctor for -anything-, heck, wasn't it just a few years ago where because of the prevalence of people geoing to the doctors for every little thing was going to create more drug resista lnt illnesses?

it's not people going to the doctors that causes drug resistance, it's the repeated treatment of the same bacterial infections with a broad spectrum of antibiotics. This has a lot to do with tort liability, a subject I'm not as well versed on as I would like to be. I do think that tort reform should be a part of any comprehensive medical reform, but I think that we have to be careful.

In general, if it makes someone sick with obvious symptoms, they are going to get help here in the US. Its just the common reaction, not sure about in other countries (the US is the only country I've lived in for an extended period of time, though I have traveled to many different countries) but in the USA, a lot of people go to the doctor or even the emergency room for every thing.

"in general" is a stretch in this case. Lots of conditions can't be taken care of in an emergent care setting. This may be true for broken limbs, allergic reactions, and like conditions, but it doesn't address the situation with regard to chronic conditions, diabetes, cancer, and so on. This is the situation that most urgently needs to be addressed. If there was a law like the 1986 "patient dumping" law that applied to chronic care as well as ERs it would cost the medical industry billions. as is they are only required to "stabilize." and then they can ask for your insurance card and or show you the door.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[timmarhy]

while you are reasonably correct on the causes of the great depression, you fail hard.

1. is over already

2. paying off loans isn't what causes contraction of money supply.

3. if you want to single out houses as the only asset, then yes.

4. yes, there's no getting away from the fact companies have taken a hammering

5. most places have had a fall in profits, there are some standouts though. gold producers are one of them.

6. here is your big fail. jobless rate in 1933 was 24.9% http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/cm20030124ar03p1.htm

7. here is your biggest problem - doomers like yourself who are still claiming the sky is falling when their are CLEARLY signs of recovery worldwide.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[girlintraining]

here is your biggest problem - doomers like yourself who are still claiming the sky is falling when their are CLEARLY signs of recovery worldwide.

I'm not all doom and gloom... Forty years ago we had a middle class. We don't anymore. We have rich people, and we have poor people... Just like the countries we've been shipping our jobs out to. One of the things that made America what it was is a strong middle class. That's vaporized now under the heat of globalization, and this is something that's come about because of the current economic crisis. Yeah, the economy as a whole may recover, but our quality of life will never be the same. For many people -- there will be no recovery.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[stdarg]

Right. 62% of all personal bankruptcies in the U.S. in 2007 were caused by health problems and 78% of those filers had insurance. Citation [businessweek.com] That doesn't just make things more expensive for those with healthcare, it makes them more expensive for policy holders, anyone who wants a loan, small businesses, investors, and stockholders. And it's not just over the short term, it has an overall detrimental effect on our nation's economic well being which continues to mount.

Health care is too expensive, no question. We're not going to fix it with preventive medicine (source 1 source 2, may be related I didn't check). Spreading out the cost sounds great until you realize that a lot of people don't have insurance because they can't afford it, and won't be paying their full share if they go for a public option either, so the same people who are paying more now will be paying more then too. If you want to make health care more affordable to have to do things to reduce the cost directly. Then more people would get insurance anyway because it would be cheaper.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I think the collapse of the US middle class is in large part the fault of the middle class itself. In a world of increasing sophistication, most people ignored it and didn't adapt to it, and they didn't instill into their children the importance of education. The idea that one can live very comfortably simply being unskilled labor was a foolish one that idea only worked for a generation or two. The economic hegemony of the US post WWII helped feed that idea, but part of that hegemony was sustained by malicious policies against other countries.

Maybe globalization made that middle class collapse happen faster, but an unsustainable situation like that wasn't going to stay that way forever. Closing borders to trade usually hasn't worked out well either, all that does is incite reciprocal action.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[CodeBuster]

I do think that tort reform should be a part of any comprehensive medical reform, but I think that we have to be careful.

Which will never happen as long as the Democrats are in power. The attorneys, through their firms and state bar associations, are collectively among the largest donors to the Democratic National Committee, Democrat elected officials (i.e. Congressmen and Senators) and Democratic presidential candidates (like our current President Obama). There are two groups that you can bet the farm that Democrats won't cross: lawyers and unions (in that order). No attorney that I know of has ever supported laws which limit their ability to go to court and sue for lots of money (its like freedom of speech to them). The attorneys will fight tort reform tooth and nail and I would be shocked if Obama signs any bill, or at least any bill that actually has teeth, which puts a national cap on damages awarded at lawyerpoint.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Goldberg's Pants]

If preventive medicine is more expensive than the failed system you currently have in place, then why is more spent per capita on healthcare in the US than any other western country, while your system continues to be ranked as one of the worst in the world, falling far behind those who do engage in preventive medicine.

Living embodiment of less for more.

There is an old adage. "An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure."

Your observations of how public healthcare works are deeply, and I do mean DEEPLY flawed.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Brian_Ellenberger]

People are surprised by this? Our inner cities are rotting. Our economy is in shambles. People are living squallor and poverty on an unprecidented scale in this country. We're a breeding ground now for all manners of disease, both social and medical.

And worst of all, there is a massive wave of over exaggeration plaguing the country! I cannot believe this was marked as 5 insightful. Poverty and squallor on unprecidented scale? Have you heard of the Great Depression? What facts and figures are you quoting? According to the US census at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty07/pov07fig03.pdf the poverty percentage has been at between 10 and 15 percent since the mid 60s. In 1959 it was 23%, so nearly a quarter of the population was in poverty!

We're a breeding ground now for all manners of disease, both social and medical? Start with the medical. Based on what science? Tens of thousands dying of cholera is a sign of breeding disease. Random cases of strange medical ailments because people in 3rd world countries immigrated to the US is not. What is your solution, stop all immigration? As for social disease, since the founding of the country people have been complaining about various "social diseases" plaguing the US. Heck, the crazy temperance movement managed to get all alcohol banned as a cure for the various social diseases resulting from drinking.

As for the decline of America, I've been hearing it all my life. First is was the Japanese, how they were much smarter and so much harder working than Americans, blah, blah, blah. Now it is the Chinese.

And no, I hate to disappoint you but we aren't going to be the Roman Empire because I don't see any barbarians who are going to come and raze our cities. We do not decline so much as everyone else is catching up to us. And the only reason there is catching up is because almost everyone else was demolished 60 years ago during WWII. There is no fundamental reason that the US should be the sole military, economic, and political power for the rest of human history. If we were a bunch of evil jerks, the US could try and use its power to keep everyone else down. But we don't and good for us for that.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[beadfulthings]

There's a huge difference between "government healthcare" and "public health" at least as the term is used in the U.S. Public health traditionally concerns itself with disease control and prevention in communities of people--both small and large. It is concerned with the prevention of disease in entire populations as opposed to caring for individuals. Huge, enormous distinction there. If we're beginning to harbor populations with these parasitic diseases, we damned well want the Public Health Service involved and making recommendations for prevention, control, and treatment. We need them as watchdogs for occupational health, for control of epidemics (think Centers for Disease Control), and for identification and control of conditions that promote and cause diseases (dirty water, dirty food, the above-mentioned parasites). Even blatantly obvious functions like restaurant inspections fall under the general umbrella of "public health." It's short-sighted to ignore the conditions mentioned in the original article just because they're present only in poor or isolated segments of the population. They won't stay that way for long.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Mr. Freeman]

We don't have a middle class anymore? What the hell are you smoking and where can I get some?

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[buswolley]

Health care is a national security issue.

It should be sold as one too. Hell the Department of Defense should provide it too! It would pass too. No one votes against national defense.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[PachmanP]

"If you want to make health care more affordable to have to do things to reduce the cost directly." The only way of doing that is cutting corners and reducing standards for medicine and medical equipment. That's a bad idea no matter how you put it.

Or fix stuff like my insurance company "negotiating" $900 worth of blood tests down to the $90 they actually pay the lab. If it's $90 worth of blood tests (which it is since the lab somehow stays in business), then say it's $90. That would open a whole world of people being able to get catastrophic coverage and pay out of pocket for the basics which would put people in touch with what it actually costs and provide price pressure.

As the system stands, the buyer has hardly any idea of what the seller is actually being paid. Nobody has any inclination of what the actual cost is. The insurance companies can throw their weight around and get reasonable prices, but the poor schmuck that doesn't have insurance pays MSPR. If I could pay the same "bulk rates" as the insurances companies, my medical costs, excluding anything catastrophic, would be less than what I pay for insurance.

People like to make a big deal out of free market medicine failing, but we don't have free market medicine because the actual cost has been abstracted away from so many of the consumers that there's no cost control.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Anonymous Coward]

because its the governments job to force everyone else to pay for you?

healthcare is not a right. its a good, a service, a professional trade practiced by trademan who deserves to get paid for what he does. and it's not my job to pay for your use of his skills.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[buswolley]

ass.

If your neighbor's house is on fire, would you let your house burn down too be cause you don't want to pay for a fire department?

Health care, much like fire protection, curbs the spread of disease.

Seriously, healthcare is no different than having a standing army. It is for the national defense.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Kral_Blbec]

If you go to the emergency room they already cant turn you away if you are unable to pay. I've met a few people that go there for anything, on the public's tab.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[girlintraining]

I think the collapse of the US middle class is in large part the fault of the middle class itself.

Blaming the victim has rarely been a useful argument. It also happens to be a meritless one in this case. The middle class has disintegrated because the middle class has become a victim of a sudden change in market dynamics, brought on by decisions by our politicians and business leaders to initiate those changes. The labor market, like any other, is dictated by the laws of supply and demand. Demand remains constant but when we allowed companies to use labor outside this country -- to ship jobs overseas and goods back to us, we suddenly and dramatically increased supply but without a corresponding bump in demand -- those third world countries that the jobs went to aren't as economically developed as ours are. They lack the purchasing power parity necessary to create a corresponding demand to maintain the price point of labor.

Net result? The cost of labor in almost every market has fallen through the floor. It means big profits for companies that have infrastructure developed with our dollars and taxes, but relying on a labor pool several times larger. We sacrificed a short term profit gain for a long term loss -- infrastructure is no longer being maintained and America is now rotting from the inside out.

We didn't do this to ourselves -- a few people who wanted to make a few extra bucks in the short term did, and it's cost us our future.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[s4m7]

He could have started small and been successful but he bit off more than he could chew.

He repeatedly said throughout the campaign that one of his major 1st year issues was going to be health care reform, and outlined most of what has transpired here. If you voted for him because you listened to him during the election, you should have known this was coming.

I also fundamentally disagree that he should have "started small" because it's not like we have a lot of time to dick around with this. The last time major healthcare reform happened in the US was over 40 years ago. The time to make big changes is now, and no matter if he had gone big or small, the other side of the aisle was going to make it ugly for him.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[IWannaBeAnAC]

healthcare is not a right

That is where most of the rest of the (developed) world disagrees with you. Almost all medical problems happen by chance, to some unlucky person whose dice comes up the wrong way. Why should someone be forced into bankruptcy, or left die of some treatable disease, for something they have no control over? Let me put it another way: suppose that tomorrow you are diagnosed with some rare but treatable form of cancer. Unfortunately the treatment costs one million dollars, and your medical insurance (if you have any) refuses to pay. The cancer is rare enough that, spread across the whole population, the cost of treating all cases per year is rather small. Do you think you should be given the treatment? If so, who should pay?

It is a common argument, "I'm not going to get sick, why should I have to pay for everone else's healthcare?". It works just fine, right up until the moment where you do get sick.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[hairyfeet]

Yep, if you want to see the real effects of poverty and lack of health care just come to AR, right smack dab in the middle of the good old USA. According to my late sister's doctor they have even started using a new acronym for those that die from lack of basic health care "cattle" spelled CATL, which means "can't afford to live". The poor have to live on the cheapest (read fattiest) cuts of meat and basic filler like potatoes. They can't afford a dentist, which means the resulting massive infection caused by a cracked tooth ends up with quite a few dead from heart failure, and the ever rising cost of medicine and health care means that many die of things that could be prevented or treated with $$$ that they simply don't have-

Like my late sister whose ashes I bury next week. Cause of death? Lack of copper and vitamins. Yep, simple lack of vitamins and minerals took my 36 year old sister away from her two teenage boys. But thanks to the royal buttraping we ALL get on even the most basic medicine the copper and vitamins in saline solution she required to live was $1600+ a month, and even with me helping out there was no way to afford it. So she was a case of CATL-can't afford to live. And to add insult to injury my state is one of those that pushed "tort reform" which made it so no matter how horribly a doctor fucked you up your maximum amount is 250k, and no lawyer will touch a medical malpractice case here anymore. So the bastard that we heard from a nurse later was most likely stoned while he operated on my sister, and fucked up at least three other girls, got to just walk away. The only thing that gives me comfort is the son of a bitch lawyer that pushed through tort reform here died broke and in agony, because nobody would take his case after a doctor butchered his nervous system and he blew all his savings on medicine.

So yeah, you want to see a third world country right here in the USA? Come to AR. Hell the southern half of the state is littered with tar paper shacks that look like something out of "Mississippi Burning". You are only seeing a doctor in the ER, and with so many hospitals closing you are lucky if there is more than a "bandaid station" within 60 miles of you, the strong back jobs have all been taking by illegals that live 10 to a house and send the peanuts the company pays them back home, and more and more of our educated jobs are either being offshored or given to H1-Bs. So give it a few more years, with our infrastructure rotting and our cities falling apart, and then we'll look just like Brazil! Yay USA! Sadly more and more we are proving our late great George Carlin's punchline to be true-"You know why they call it "The American Dream"? Because you have to be asleep to believe in it."

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[s4m7]

they already cant turn you away if you are unable to pay

Well that's not entirely true. They are in fact only obligated to provide stabilizing care for actual emergencies by the 1986 patient dumping law. Anything chronic is generally out.

I've met a few people that go there for anything, on the public's tab.

That's not exactly how it works. The government doesn't reimburse the hospital for patients who come into the ER but have no insurance. The hospital bills the patient. The patient either pays the bill or it goes to collections. If it goes to collections, and eventually the patient does pay, chances are the hospital will only see 25% of that money. The cost to the hospital of "ER Abuse" is distributed across the rest of the hospital and passed on to insurers and eventually gets paid by policy holders. So you're right to imply that the public is still picking up the tab, it's just only the insured, and not all taxpayers who shoulder that particular burden.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Cstryon]

My daughter had Leukemia, she passed away earlier this year. It still works fine, I still shouldn't have to pay for your health care. We got help for hers, but it wasn't all payed for, I still owe money.

But if it wasn't for those tradesmen, with a skill that they worked hard to learn, and if it wasn't for their interest in hematology, and oncology, my daughter would not have gotten the care she did.

Those doctors helped her beat the cancer, (She got sick from having no immune system, that's what we lost her from.) I truly believe that if they didn't earn that money, and say, " Hey, I worked hard to learn this, I will charge for my goods." she wouldn't have gotten expert care.

My dad was a mason for ~30-40 years. He can build a damn good wall, and a damn good house. He could build one for you. Don't you deserve shelter? Doesn't he deserve to get paid what he chooses for his skill and trade? Health care is a need, but I shouldn't have to pay for you to get it. I should be paying those men and women who work hard to learn how to treat people.

Have you ever waited at the MVD? You want those same people to choose when you can be treated?

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[spicate]

We pay more, and this creates big companies that develop drugs that get sold for less to the rest of the world - at least it sure feels like it.

Pharmaceuticals only account for about 8% of US health scare spending, and the government already funds a substantial amount of drug development. In fact, the government and nonprofit foundations already fund a huge amount of medical research.

If we can't fix medicare/medicaid we don't have a chance of building a sustainable, effective general health plan.

We don't have a sustainable private system right now either. Insurance companies are doing everything they can to reduce coverage while increasing premiums. How is this better than a public option? One thing Medicare does quite effectively is drive down the costs of care. Ask any doctor. We need a public plan to control costs.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[buswolley]

Troll? I thought it was rather an insightful analogy. We can't afford to let disease spread. Having a piss-poor health system with uninsured, untreated, un-quarantined vectors, the USA remains vulnerable to both natural and intentional attack by bio-weaponry. It is just like fire spreading. Yeah its not my house on fire, but it can spread and come to me. Thus self-interest should lead us to be concerned with the welfare of our fellow human beings.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[moosesocks]

A great majority of Americans have thrown science and logic out the window, and choose instead to vote with their passions and emotions.

If this isn't a social disease, I don't know what is.

Keeping on topic, the healthcare debate is a great example of this, given that the right wing have successfully managed to convince the masses to actively protest against their own interests by spreading a net of thinly-veiled lies and passionate arguments.

What sort of person would actually believe that the president wanted to start "death squads" without actually verifying the claim?

I'd be happy to have a reasoned debate about the issue -- there are actually good arguments to be had on both sides of the issue. However, reason appears to have left the picture entirely.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[jd]

It makes very little difference whether it is unprecedented or not. Diseases need ONE carrier. That is sufficient.

Start looking at the numbers (over a million undocumented, uninsured and entirely legal US citizens live homeless in the New York subway system, and most cities don't bother to try and estimate any more).

Now look at the total in the US who are considered to be living below a living wage (which is a good deal higher than the so-called "poverty line" but is still the minimum for basic nutritional and environmental concerns). It's getting on for 85% of the KNOWN population!

Since the unknown population will certainly lack any kind of healthcare, have a dangerously unhealthy diet, and be living in unsanitary conditions, the population at high risk is going to be much higher than that 85%.

And, no, the suburbs won't be safe. Many people in the suburbs work in cities, and when in cities are likely to come in contact with one or more people who are at high risk. Airborne disease doesn't require more than a single cough.

Swine Flu started in ONE small village in Mexico. It wasn't even looked at by heath officials there until it had spread for months. After Mexico declared it had a problem, ambulance workers and hospitals refused to take anyone with flu symptoms and health inspectors refused to monitor infected areas. Result - it spread out of control.

Health officials in the US largely ignored it even after people started dropping dead. It's now a raging pandemic that was entirely preventable. There were MANY opportunities to stop it, by Mexico and by the US, but cowardice in Mexico and greed in the US resulted in inaction.

Once upon a time, West Nile Virus was practically unknown in the US. It is now a killer that claims lives from all parts of society. Yes, the poor suffer more, but the poor don't suffer exclusively.

The MRSA "superbug" (which kills more hospital patients than any other single cause) originated in ONE hosptial in Australia and can be traced to ONE patient carrying the disease from ward to ward. ONE carrier and we now have a bug that kills globally.

People across society WILL die from these new diseases, and when they do, the newspapers will doubtless claim nobody could have foretold it happening, and that the country was powerless anyway.

From the days of Typhoid Mary, we've known of the dangers even a single carrier has posed. And every malnourished person, every uninsured person, every person unable to take an hour off work to see a doctor for economic reasons, or those who won't for religious reasons, they are ALL potential carriers. Every one of them.

We're damned lucky that the rare diseases that have broken out in the US and Europe in the last hundred years have been relatively difficult to transmit. Marburg being one of the deadlier.

Spanish Flu wasn't a rare disease, just a very deadly mutation of a common one. If you include that, and the hundreds of millions it killed, then we're still damned lucky. That was still before widespread travel, antibiotic-resistant bacteria and antiviral-resistant viruses.

History says there need by just ONE contageous carrier for a global catastrophe. The failure to provide adequate healthcare to hundreds of millions of Americans increases the risk hundreds of millions of times over. The failure to research "less profitable" diseases (the heliobacter-caused stomach ulcers being a classic example) increases the risks even to those who ARE insured and ARE going to the doctors when needed.

And the failure to provide adequate medical care to poorer nations just creates fertile breeding grounds for even deadlier diseases.

Humanity's epitath will likely read: Suicide By Microbe.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Dionysus]

Those doctors helped her beat the cancer, (She got sick from having no immune system, that's what we lost her from.) I truly believe that if they didn't earn that money, and say, " Hey, I worked hard to learn this, I will charge for my goods." she wouldn't have gotten expert care.

I'm curious to why you think experts in countries with socialized medicine don't get paid.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[jd]

France, Canada, Britain and Japan, together with America, are the top 5 leading nations in healthcare. I doubt any of them get third-world "discounts". Aside from possibly Japan, all have horribly bad eating habits - obesity in Britain isn't that much lower than that in the United States.

But let's look at the figures. Britain, PER CAPITA, has half the rate of heart attacks and spends half as much as the US. The four nations I mention pay, on average, 50 cents for every $200 spent on health-care in the US. I'm not sure about Japan, but the rest ALL manage to have public health services.

Now, let's look at the other side, competition. Britain has the NHS which is universal. It also has BUPA (private healthcare that's so profitable it can even afford to run its own damn hospitals), Standard Life, Orchid, HealthTrust, PatientChoice, AXA PPP, Essential Healthcare, HSA, Norwich Union Healthcare, General & Medical,... In short, not what I'd call a shortage.

So, go on. Tell me how a public health service would "ruin" the private insurance companies. Convince me BUPA is just an illusion. Go ahead. Persuade me that Japan is getting medicines "on the cheap" as part of foreign aid shipments to poor nations. Convince me that even those medical marvels invented in Canada, Britain or Japan are more expensive in America solely in order to recoup the costs.

Yes, the top 5% of Americans CAN pay more, and prices have been adjusted to maximize profits not availability, so cater TO those 5%. What about the other 95%? Since America has never been able to adjust the ratio, it will always be 5:95, and that means it doesn't matter what the 95% earn. The prices will simply go up because the profits are all with the 5%.

You happen to be one of the 5%. So is everyone on Slashdot, because nobody in the 95% is spending time talking. Me, well, although I'm in the top 5% as well (or I wouldn't be here), I have medical conditions which make getting insurance a real pain and which mean I spend $250+ a month to stay alive because insurance won't touch me.

I know three people with spinal injuries who would LOVE to get away with something so cheap and none of them have my earning power. They each spend more in a week than I do in a month - those weeks they have enough money to spend on such luxuries. With those kinds of injuries, most work is right out of the question, which means you either have to start off very rich OR live your life on the bread line.

Assuming the people I know are roughly representative of the population, traumatic injuries and life-threatening conditions are likely more common amongst those 95% than serious illness is amongst the 5%.

When I look at America as it exists today, I see a world that is socially backwards, something out of a Dickens novel. Britain hasn't had workhouses for the poor since the Victorian era and abolished slavery in 1770. Even the fruit-pickers in Britain have unions and have a far better standard of living than those in the "land of opportunity".

I happen to think Britain is regressive and repressed in many other ways, and that America has got quite a bit right, but American society is so.... backwards! It's barely better than it was when the Mayflower arrived. In some ways, it might even be worse - I'm fairly sure they didn't have a 1% prison population.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Anonymous Coward]

I had lymphoma and went through the UK system. I had paid up front through taxes, it is a type of insurance but without the profit motive. I got the best treatment from dedicated doctors and nurses. The treatment was the most up to date. I was also admitted directly onto the haematology ward when I got an blood infection. Their dedicated microbiologist cultured the infection and identified the correct antibiotic

I paid nothing at the point of delivery, there was no one from the insurance company telling me what I could or could not have.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[oji-sama]

What (s)he said. Also, while the experts do get paid, if you really want to see that the treatment is paid completely by you, nothing prevents you going to a private doctor and paying some more. Although unfortunately some of those private treatments are also subsidized... mmmm. Perhaps one should go and get the treatment abroad...

(And nothing prevents the experts from starting a private clinic either)

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[hairyfeet]

And you think VOTING is gonna solve things? Allow me to say BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA! What country do YOU live in pal? Because in case you ain't noticed we have been "Coke VS Pepsi" for at least the past 45+ years, probably longer. Since Obama won anyway, their vote didn't matter, correct? In 4 years you can come back here and see that NOTHING has changed, just as it didn't for Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr, Reagan, Carter, etc.

You see your pissy little vote just can't compete with legalized bribery. Sorry but it is true. if we actually got the will of the people we would be out of Iraq by now, Pot would be legal, we would have affordable health care, etc. But all it takes is the head of a multinational corporation walking into an office with a blank check and yours and millions of other voters desires mean absolutely jack shit. We have been Democrat at the local and state level for damned near 100 years, don't seem to have changed much.

Perhaps you should enjoy this bit by the late Bill Hicks, who was from AR BTW, and notice the even though the man has been dead for 20 years the bit is STILL true. And I would argue that short of completely tossing out the current system and starting over it will be true 50 years from now. That is of course if the teaming masses of ever poorer people don't eventually get tired of it and burn the thing to the ground. Funny how no democracy in history has lasted for more than a few centuries. Most likely because they end up just like us-hopelessly corrupted and tilted against the ever growing numbers of the poor by the ever smaller super wealthy at the top.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Trepidity]

I'm willing to believe that. But it's only worth voting the Democrats out of office on that issue if there's reason to believe that it would happen if the Republicans were in power. But the Republicans controlled both branches of government, with sizable majorities, for six years, and it didn't happen. Instead, we got a ridiculous government-funded prescription drugs entitlement in Medicare Part D---the exact opposite of any attempt at cost reduction.

To argue against the current party in power on an issue in a way that's convincing, you need to find an issue on which there is some viable alternative party that has a better position on that issue.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[jo_ham]

And, had that happened to you and your daughter here in the UK, you would have received exactly the same care, you just wouldn't have to pay for it, other than through your NI taxes, which are considerably less than US insurance premiums (when the actual cost of the premium is considered).

There are a lot a myths about universal healthcare, all of them regularly circulated by people like Faux News and the right wing shouty talk radio hosts, and Big Pharma and Big Medical who have a vested interest in keeping the US system the way it is.

The myth that doctors, nurses, researchers and other medical professions under a Universal system don't get paid properly for their "trade" (in the UK, doctors are handsomely paid for their work) is a total lie. The myth that "the government decides whether you get treated" is also an utter fabrication.

I am very sorry your daughter died and that sometimes, even with the current advances in medicine, that people sometimes can't be saved, but universal care is not the demon that the bought-and-paid for interests in the US advertise it as.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[Blakey Rat]

Amen.

Thank you for bringing some sanity to that horribly cynical and pessimistic first post.

Slashdotters: the modern world, the world we live in *right now*, is better than any point in human history in every measurable way. That is a simple fact.

Yes, you're concerned about people below the poverty line now. So am I. But you have to realize that modern Americans in *poverty* have far more luxuries than the richest man on earth 200 years ago.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[girlintraining]

Are you just a poorly designed AI that spits out buzzwords more or less at random? Because your posts get steadily more confused and less connected with reality.

Yes, and the slashdot moderators are also part of the AI, which is why I always get high marks. The matrix has you man. Better start running.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[CAIMLAS]

I agree with you that healthcare is like a fire or police department. Neither of those, however, should be (or have historically been) federally funded. They, like healthcare, should be a local issue (if we're going to cast it in the light of a security issue at all).

And what are we talking about when we're talking about 'healthcare'? Are we talking about prescription drugs for people who have lived poorly (diabetes) when they refuse to change their lifestyle? Should the fireman risk his existence to save the idiot who refuses to leave his burning home?

If we're talking about epidemics and healthcare when it's a triage or similar situation (emergencies), certainly. But a pregnancy isn't an emergency, and neither is a preventable disease brought on by self-abuse.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[moeinvt]

"Seriously, healthcare is no different than having a standing army"

Thomas Jefferson described standing armies as "inconsistent" with freedom. Elbridge Gerry described them as the "bane of liberty" and James Madison said that the "greatest danger to liberty is from large standing armies."

I therefore concur with your conclusion. Allowing our Federal government ro run healthcare is a danger to liberty, and completely inconsistent with freedom.

Note: One would think that after the Federal government lied about the Iraq war, lied about the stimulus, continues to lie about the Wall Street bailouts, undermined our freedom with the USA PATRIOT Act, military commissions act, indefinite detentions, warrantless wiretapping, telecom immunity, etc. etc. the people would be a little more reluctant to trust them with trillions of healthcare $$$ and more of their personal information.

Re:The US isn't all first world.

[jo_ham]

Yes, it is. Employer-covered plans are heavily subsidised with group rates, and the costs can still be over $500 per employee.

I personally know several Americans who pay over $1000 per month in premiums (and that doesn't include the cost of drugs or other things that the insurance company won't pay for).

Health insurance is ludicrously expensive in the US.

Close the borders

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Every time I turn around the US government is finding new and innovative ideas in fomenting anti-immigrant sentiment. Scratch that. The US government is using the same old tried and true methods of fomenting anti-immigrant sentiment. They steal jobs. They bring crime. They bring disease. It's the same old song and dance.

In a world of modern transportation, it is essentially impossible to screen every person who crosses into our country for diseases. The solution isn't more border patrols on the Tex-Mex border, it's better healthcare for those who can't afford it. If the at-risk groups are the border towns and poverty-stricken, it makes sense to help them rather than try to cut off the flow of immigrants.

I used to fly internationally all the time, but with the growing anti-immigrant policies of the US, I find myself having a worse and worse time traveling even though I am a US citizen. The TSA and Immigration Control have made flying a mode of travel that is completely unattractive.

Re:Close the borders

[TheGreenNuke]

The solution isn't more border patrols on the Tex-Mex border, it's better healthcare for those who can't afford it.

But if they still can't afford what difference will it make if it's better? While I understand what you mean, your actual words help point out the true underlying cause, the cost of healthcare has risen out of control.

Re:Close the borders

[Anonymous Coward]

Fucking the immigrants is a way to spread diseases, not to mention causing more of the immigrants.

Besides, that "Fix it yourself" attitude is one of those things that is just short-sighted, and easily contradicted by the concept that the world isn't just a bunch of isolated islands.

Re:Close the borders

[Macrat]

Fuck the immigrants. This is MY country, not theirs. Let them fix their own failed states south of the border.

Especially when they aren't "immigrants"

Re:Close the borders

[andymadigan]

Unfortunately the "We'll fix it" attitude leads to invading other countries (Iraq). Further, you can't have a welfare state AND have uncontrolled immigration. So, you have a choice. Have a small government, no government services other than defense and lots of immigrants (that describes the U.S. pretty well for the first hundred or so years). Or, you can have roads, social security, medicare, welfare, public schools, etc. but little or no immigration.

Can we help people in other countries? Sure. Federal money (< 1% of our budget) does go to works in other countries. However, if they decide to come here illegally, the most we can provide them with is helpful transportation at gunpoint back to their own country.

Re:Close the borders

[Anonymous Coward]

I think today is the first time I have read slashdot comments and been utterly disgusted by a large amount of the non-troll posts. I never realised how racist slashdot really was.

Re:Close the borders

[andymadigan]

Who said it had to do with health? I thought we were talking about failed or autocratic states. That does some times lead to health problems among citizens.

GWB invaded Iraq for revenge and oil. However, it was a "bad" government, and that was an underlying cause.

Re:Close the borders

[mysidia]

They are also diseases that are common among immigrants, and that follow them in.

They may be old arguments, but that doesn't detract from their indisputable accuracy.

Particularly with these diseases which were previously unique to areas that immigrants come from. It is eminently clear where the disease is being sourced from.

The diseases are not ones that can be effectively treated by healthcare, there is no cure/effective treatment known to most of these diseases, the prognosis is not good, if you should catch one, your life will almost certainly be cut short, even if you have the best health care money can buy, the parasites cause permanent scars.

In most cases, the better good of society would be better achieved by quarantining people found to have these diseases.

Providing health care services to everyone who can't afford them does not fix these diseases. Ultimately research would be required into a cure -- the free market and large profits that can be made, are ultimately, the incentives for this research to get conducted.

However, it indeed would be beneficial to the public for screening for these diseases to be mandatory and required for employment and travel within the US.

At least it would encourage people who unknowingly have the disease to get checked, and attempt whatever (unfortunately damaging) treatments are available, to help get a handle on the epidemic.

Re:Close the borders

[mysidia]

In a world of modern transportation, it is essentially impossible to screen every person who crosses into our country for diseases.

Sure, it's possible, but requires further inconveniencing people who wish to cross, and reducing the throughput (the rate at which people are legally allowed to cross borders). And might have a negative impact on tourists, if it took them several days waiting in line to get screened and admitted.

It is also more expensive (the most likely reason it's not actually done) and requires more paperwork to keep track of screening results and prove who's been properly screened to allow them to pass security.

With regards to US immigrants who are likely to have this disease "Modern" transportation means the automobile, which has been around since oh 1900, probably using a 15-year-old old clunker they loaned out at a junkyard for a few hundred $100.

There have not been any significant transportation enhancements in recent decades that justify lax border controls, or letting people in with proper health screening.

Instead it is the number and frequency of people wishing to cross borders.

Re:Close the borders

[Virak]

So, how does it feel to be completely lacking empathy or any sort of care for your fellow humans?

Re:Close the borders

[Black Parrot]

Fuck the immigrants. This is MY country, not theirs.

Rio Grande, Bering Strait, or Atlantic Ocean - how did YOUR ancestors get here?

Re:Close the borders

[dunkelfalke]

When counting by percentage of population, Sweden would actually be pretty much on par with the USA (12.3% and 12.81% respectively). Germany's immigrants are 12.31% of the whole population, in Austria there are 14.9%, in Canada 18.76% and in Switzerland 22.89%.

All of the countries I have listed do have socialized medicine.

Natural Selection

[Sponge Bath]

You want globalization? Well here it comes. You don't want globalization? Well here it comes anyways. Attention citizens of the cosmos: be prepared for a brutal culling of the herd. Nothing personal, it's just the mechanics of the universe.

Re:Natural Selection

[sjames]

Attention social evolutionists: poor people in the U.S. have guns and little to lose. When they have nothing to lose, the bullets will fly.

Re:Natural Selection

[MadUndergrad]

Mod parent up. This is a good reason for a social safety net if I've ever heard one. So what if they don't "deserve" it? At least it'll keep them from robbing and murdering you.

If only Madagascar...

[gardyloo]

...had shut off all seaports and airports sooner.

It's the flu!

[russlar]

It's that new flu strain I keep hearing about, the H1B flu!

Re:It's the flu!

[Tablizer]

It's that new flu strain I keep hearing about, the H1B flu!

It's real: I got hit so bad, I had to take a year off.
     

Re:MUCH MORE IS COMING

[MichaelSmith]

If it was easier to enter the country legally fewer people would do it illegally. Then it might be easier to apply health checks on the way in.

Talk like an infected pirate day

[Tablizer]

Aiy captain, I be gotten scurvy!

Thank God for HMOs

[MartinSchou]

Well, at least there are no government bureaucrats standing between the sick people and the doctors who could detect and treat these diseases.

USA, USA, USA!

Or something ... it is quite disappointing to see the world's richest country with what is at times the best health care in the world unable to keep simple infections and parasites from affecting a large portion of its population.

Re:Thank God for HMOs

[dkf]

Well, at least there are no government bureaucrats standing between the sick people and the doctors who could detect and treat these diseases.

Sure. You've got private bureaucrats instead. More cost, less accountability. Tell me again how it's better.

HELLO, Where has everyone been for 200+ years?

[cenc]

I am sorry. Invasive species and diseases have been entering the U.S. since the first pilgrims got off the boat with their pock infested blankets. The U.S. has always turned a blind eye to the poor dying of them, until they spread to the middle class and rich. Now congress thinks this is an emergency?

I think author of this article needs to spend sometime getting to know their American history book. The only thing that has changed is there is now more poor. How about treating that disease?

Rich

[mindbrane]

Remember the end of 'War of the Worlds'? IIRC, at least in the old film, the narrator speaks of God in His wisdom populating our little blue planet with microbes that defeat an invading alien horde that we with all our military might and technology can't stand against. If, of the 5 (Pollution) Horsemen of the Apocalypse, pestilence should be the big winner then the irony of it all playing off the end of the 'War of the Worlds' will be a sauce so rich and thick in irony as to be perfectly suited to Pestilence's feast.

Certainly globalization plays a part, but, perhaps, more importantly, we're poking big holes in the biomass. Threatened species adapt and the little microbes whose hosts were, in some cases, shuffling around the globe, and, in others, driving to extinction have to adapt. Adaption may entail making the leap to a new species and, along with our livestock, we're the most like landing spot.

The first test of an intelligent species is ensuring its survival. We now adequately know the limitations of our biosphere, we know its interconnectedness, and yet, we can't act rationally. There are now 6 billion of us, if you accept that there will be 9 billion then I hold that there will be 12 billion before we have international laws in place to stop us from destroying ourselves. 12 billion is just my loose estimate based on current numbers and the projected growth in the face of our current plight. Given our natures are a blend, of greed, lust, fear and shame tempered by altruism, and, further given our current and projected circumstances I think our best chance is runaway economic growth spinning off R&D that might mitigate against our most pressing problems. If we've any safety to look forward to it's ironically in numbers because the talent necessary to solve the problems we face doesn't seem to stem directly from industrialization or advanced infrastructure, rather, it's the small percentage who can manage and extend our knowledge base.

Infantile death in the US...

[jeffasselin]

The infantile death rate in the US is one of the highest in developed countries.

A significant portion of your population is affected by diseases that are mostly present in third-world countries and can be handled easily with proper health care and social measures.

And some of you still think universal health care is a bad idea?

Re:Infantile death in the US...

[Anonymous Coward]

We count ALL infant deaths. Most countries don't count deaths of babies born prematurely, and some places don't even count it if they die within the first few months (like Cuba.)

Hardly a fair comparison.

Irony

[Lord Kano]

500 Years ago, Europeans came to the western hemisphere and brought all kinds of diseases that the native population had no immunity against. Now, the descendants of those Europeans are getting diseases for which they have no immunity from the descendants of the natives from so long ago...

LK

US Border Policy == ???

[Anonymous Coward]

From my own experience (as a 'johhny foreigner')
1) Assume everyone is a terrorist
2) Presume they are guilty so they get fingerprinted & mugshoted.
3) Then only let those who can persuade the 'jobsworths' on Immigration that they have not come to the us to blow up the Empire State Building or Mt Rushmore.
4) If they have been to the US before, check to see if there are any outstanding speeding or parking tickets in their name. If so deport them on the next flight brandishing them as undesirables even though the offense(speeding on Mass Tpk) was some 18 years before.
5) If they finally let you in it is with the stark warning 'Don't step out of line or you will be in Gitmo before you can say I want a lawyer'

And you say the US has no border policy? Sounds like one to me.

Re:MUCH MORE IS COMING

[value_added]

As a point of fact, the US allows more legal immigration than any other country in the world.

LOL. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, right?

Sorry, you're a victim of a myth. On a per capita basis, the US accepts roughly the same number of immigrants (and/or refugees) as many western European countries, but less than other countries. By contrast, Canada accept far more. Hell, I think Greece has higher immigration numbers.

And if you factor in the anti-immigrant rhetoric and attitudes prevalent across so much of the US (and the lack of such things as health care and basic social safety nets, I'd suggest that the US is hardly a welcoming place. That's been true historically and it's true today. In the past it was the Chinese, then the Irish, then the dirty Jews and Italians; today it's the Mexicans! The reason, for example, why the US has low immigration numbers and continues to spend less per capita on charitable foreign aid than most industrialised countries, is that the US simply doesn't like and has never liked foreigners, least of all when they try to immigrate. That is, until years pass and they blend into the landscape and we recognise them as citizens like everyone else.

Granted, it's a big and wealthy country. So total numbers or dollars spent are bigger. But then, so what?

As for the article, the immigration process does require a complete health check, so the issues related to the spread of infectious diseases are addressed. The problem, however, is that not everyone who comes here is eligible to become part of that process, and there is no free public health care for them or anyone else. Consider tuberculosis, for example. Mandatory screening when applying for a green card, but the rates of infection in the US go up by 20K cases per year.

Infant death rates misleading

[Renevith]

Infant death is more common with low birth-weight and/or early babies. Lifestyle choices in the US, such as obesity and teenage motherhood, drive more low-birth-weight babies than in other countries. That has nothing to do with the health care system, unless you include "social measures" (in this case forcing people to adhere to your personal standards).

The real test of a health care system is to control for those factors. Strip away the effect of the number of low-weight babies are born here, and ask: if you're going to have a low-weight baby, where is it more likely to survive?

No one denies the problem. Our infant mortality rate is double that of Japan or Sweden. But we live different lives, on average, than people in those places. We suffer more obesity (about 10 times as much as the Japanese), and we have more births to teenagers (seven times more than the Swedes). Nearly 40 percent of American babies are born to unwed mothers.

Factors like these are linked to low birth weight in babies, which is a dangerous thing. In a 2007 study for the National Bureau of Economic Research, economists June O'Neill and Dave O'Neill noted that "a multitude of behaviors unrelated to the health-care system such as substance abuse, smoking and obesity" are connected "to the low birth weight and pre-term births that underlie the infant death syndrome."
[...]
The National Bureau of Economic Research paper points out that among the smallest infants, survival rates are better on this side of the border. What that suggests is that if we lived under the Canadian health-care system, we would not have a lower rate of infant mortality. We would have a higher one.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped0823chapmanaug23,0,7962367.column