Slashdot Mirror


How Stephen Hawking Has Defied the Odds For 50 Years

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Now aged 70, Prof Stephen Hawking, winner of 12 honorary degrees, a CBE and in 2009 awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, is an extraordinary man — but what is perhaps most extraordinary about Hawking is how he has defied and baffled medical experts who predicted he had just months to live in 1963, when he was diagnosed with Motor Neurone Disease (MND), a disease that only 5% survive for more than a decade after diagnosis. Hawking started having symptoms shortly before his 21st birthday. At first they were mild — a bit of clumsiness and few unexplained stumbles and falls but, predictably, by the very nature of the disease, his incurable condition worsened. The diagnosis came as a great shock, but also helped shape his future." (Read on, below.) Pickens continues: "'Although there was a cloud hanging over my future, I found, to my surprise, that I was enjoying life in the present more than before. I began to make progress with my research, and I got engaged to a girl called Jane Wilde, whom I had met just about the time my condition was diagnosed,' says Hawking. 'That engagement changed my life. It gave me something to live for.' Another important thing in Hawking's life has been his work and at the age of 70, Hawking continues working at the University of Cambridge and recently published a new book — The Grand Design. 'Being disabled, or physically challenged, makes no difference to how my scientific colleagues treat me apart from practical matters like waiting while I write what I want to say.' Finally the grandfather-of-three continues to seek out new challenges and recently experienced first-hand what space travel feels like by taking a zero-gravity flight in a specially modified plane. 'People are fascinated by the contrast between my very limited physical powers, and the vast nature of the universe I deal with,' says Hawking. 'I'm the archetype of a disabled genius, or should I say a physically challenged genius, to be politically correct. At least I'm obviously physically challenged. Whether I'm a genius is more open to doubt.'"

495 comments

  1. Best care money can buy helps by blahbooboo · · Score: 5, Informative

    He also has access to an amazing amount of healthcare. Not many people can afford full time staff to maintain their lives both personally and professionally. He has people so desperate to work with him that they train for years to understand his unique communication.

    1. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, the National Health Service is wonderful.

      --
      I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
    2. Re:Best care money can buy helps by blahbooboo · · Score: 1

      I don't believe you're correct that NHS pays for his full time help...

    3. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There's something more here about his disease - I'm sorry the article doesn't really seem to go into it. Why, in particular, has he not had more significant diaphragmatic involvement leading to the respiratory failure that is typically seen at the end of life with ALS? I'm really glad he has an atypical case, but the money aspect pales in comparison to the luck he has with how his disease has progressed.

    4. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Sique · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't know about the UK and the NHS, but at least in Germany, he would be considered Pflegestufe III (support level III, more than 300 mins per day necessary, including necessary support between 10pm and 6am), and it would be fully covered by the (mandantory) support insurance.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    5. Re:Best care money can buy helps by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 2

      Guy's done what's required to warrant obscene amounts of care being provided to him. He's offered value in return for it in the form of cash and his sick smart brain.

      --
      Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
    6. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >He also has access to an amazing amount of healthcare.

      True. But after 50 years with that disease I think the luck-factor is even more amazing.

    7. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Somebody else mentioned the "privileged care" angle to me earlier this week.

      Though it may be true Hawking has better access to care than others today, when he was diagnosed at 21 I doubt anyone was falling all over themselves to work with yet another young academic struck ill. It is nothing short of astounding that he has survived (without a respirator) in the face of ALS, and equally astounding that his will to continue working in the face of losing all motor control has not been fazed.

      No discredit to his staff a medical team, which I'm sure must be very able. He's beaten the odds against death, lost control of his physical body, and continued to do pioneering science work in the face of it. Those facets of Hawking have less to do with his current level of access to care, and more to do with his DNA and courage.

      Really, amazing dude.

    8. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, it's true it's basically all NHS.

    9. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JoeMerchant · · Score: 5, Informative

      He also has access to an amazing amount of healthcare. Not many people can afford full time staff to maintain their lives both personally and professionally. He has people so desperate to work with him that they train for years to understand his unique communication.

      Money and people who care do help, but a neighbor of mine came down with a related disease 3 years ago, she died 1 year ago, and not for lack of a caring family with the resources to do anything possible.

      When your diaphragm is paralyzed, it's over, or at least very unpleasant to continue. Hawking has been unusually lucky that his disease did not spread to basic autonomic, or extensive cognitive functions, as it all too often does.

    10. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Sure, if you are Stephen Hawking, but if he was just an ordinary bloke they would have put him on the Liverpool Care Pathway some time back (oh, and no need to mention this fact to the patient or his family).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    11. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JoeMerchant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Guy's done what's required to warrant obscene amounts of care being provided to him. He's offered value in return for it in the form of cash and his sick smart brain.

      Yes, that, and being born in the UK where he would receive a similar level of care if he were a penniless dolt.

      In the U.S. cash and societal value might make the difference of live or die, for him.

      In most of the "developing world," he would have to have been born into the richest of families to even hope for basic medical care that would have kept him alive.

    12. Re:Best care money can buy helps by mike2R · · Score: 0

      How witty and original.

      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    13. Re:Best care money can buy helps by ard · · Score: 2

      In Sweden, this is standard health care. Well, maybe not the most expensive equipment, but what is deemed required, along with nursing.

      Severly disabled persons can even be nursed in their homes, 24x7, by their relatives, getting an average salary by the state. This costs the tax payers million SEKs a year, per disabled person (~USD $120k), covering three full time "employees" (3x8 hours=24 hours).

      One of the reasons why we have some of the highest taxes in the world.

    14. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Night64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's funny when americans are faced with public healthcare systems that work. Actually, it's not funny, it's sad.

      --
      Grey's Law: Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
    15. Re:Best care money can buy helps by blind+biker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yep, universal healthcare is pretty awesome.

      I wonder how would a young 21 year old academic with ALS fare in the USA.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    16. Re:Best care money can buy helps by blahbooboo · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you think NHS is a pillar example of public healthcare system that works you are hugely mistaken. I am a big believer in socialized medicine,but NHS is not a great one...

    17. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MikeBabcock · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's sad is when I see people of all stripes debating against public healthcare, forgetting that they're condemning future thinkers or leaders or writers just because they (or their families) can't afford their own healthcare.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    18. Re:Best care money can buy helps by jank1887 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think he was saying it was perfect or great. He said it worked. No system is perfect. You just try for better, and sometimes you get it. Depending on the competition, sometimes it's not even that hard to get.

    19. Re:Best care money can buy helps by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But even a not-great one routinely outperforms the US system. There are horror stories to be found in both, but they're a lot easier to find in the US.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    20. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wtf? The government pays people to breastfeed their severly disabled relatives? Damn, I thought German shit porn was weird. That's just fucked up.

    21. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And, probably in the grand scheme of things, although a single person like him may be expensive, in total the amount of healthcare tax money being spent towards them is no big deal compared to dealing with, say, the effects of excessive alcohol intake in the general population.

      I'm over here in Finland, somewhat severely disabled (nowhere near like Hawking, though), and can't help but feel that the kinds of systems we have in place also play a crucial part in making sure that people like myself are actually rather independently contributing to society up to their capacity instead of dropping out of the loop totally, becoming fully dependent charity objects... whom could be then blamed even more for the full dependency they have ended up in.

    22. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Agreed.

      My first thought is, was he misdiagnosed or have a variant of the disease that has not been described yet.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    23. Re:Best care money can buy helps by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And if you explain that these system cost *less* than what we currently spend as a country on healthcare everyone ignores it and continues ranting on about entitlement and welfare and other bullshit divisive issues ingrained in their feeble minds.

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    24. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wish I had mod points to mod you up, because that's a very succinct way of putting it.

      I've lived both inside and outside of the US, and in my experience nearly every medical story that takes places in the US is a horror story that ends in pain, bankruptcy, disability, or death, while most stories coming from elsewhere are merely horror stories about inconvenience, delays, or the occasional mistake.

    25. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you think NHS is a pillar example of public healthcare system that works you are hugely mistaken. I am a big believer in socialized medicine,but NHS is not a great one...

      Well, let's ask Steven Hawkings about the NHS himself then, shall we?

      I would not be alive without the NHS

      Seems clear enough to me...

    26. Re:Best care money can buy helps by jbeaupre · · Score: 5, Informative

      In the US, being poor and/or elderly makes it easier to get health care. Medicare/Medicaid covers a lot.

      If Hawkings decided to take a job tomorrow in the US at some university, group health care would likely provide similar care to what he has now. Even before the recent laws, group health for large organizations paid for preexisting conditions.

      It's folks that aren't poor but don't get benefits from other sources that are left out in the US. The poor and the elderly already have socialize medicine.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    27. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Swampash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's amazing listening to Americans discuss the care of people with medical conditions. They just have... no... idea.

    28. Re:Best care money can buy helps by m.ducharme · · Score: 1

      I thought that he's been at the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, Ontario Canada for the last few years? If so, then Health Canada has made a contribution.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    29. Re:Best care money can buy helps by KeithJM · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, he'd probably do fine -- US universities generally have great benefits for their employees (good health insurance policies) and tend to be pretty flexible with sick leave for professors. My dad had a brain tumor and took 2 years of sick leave without any discussion of long-term disability, etc. There was another professor who had long-term kidney failure who basically gave a couple of lectures each semester for a decade and wasn't pressured to do more than that.

      If you have health insurance, the US system is hard to beat.

      The better question would be how would a young blue-collar worker with ALS fare. He would be completely screwed.

    30. Re:Best care money can buy helps by somersault · · Score: 2

      And if you suggest that they redirect a couple of billion out of the defence budget to solve relatively cheap issues like this, you get put on a special list.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    31. Re:Best care money can buy helps by m.ducharme · · Score: 1

      And yet, your health care expenses per person are less than half that of the US. Interesting. I don't think you can blame your fantastic health care for your high taxes.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    32. Re:Best care money can buy helps by jackbird · · Score: 1

      I don't think Medicare or Medicaid would come close to providing the amount of skilled nursing care Dr. Hawking requires.

    33. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      (Psst... It shouldn't matter whether or not they're thinkers, writers, etc. There be dragons down that road.)

    34. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please don't mistake all of us Americans with conservitards and the sheeple that follow their leash.

    35. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am from Germany and I must say that my two encounters with the NHS certainly did not make me envious of Britons seeking medical help. I also remember stories of British "hospital tourism" to Germany (seemed to be for larger procedures such as surgeries) from some years ago. I think there is a sensible middle ground between completely socialized and completely privatized medical care.

    36. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      can't afford their own healthcare

      So your solution is to force others at gunpoint to do it? I'm all for helping others but making it mandatory is evil. The ends don't justify the means.

    37. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because a sample size of one makes it true \o/

    38. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      From that article:

      "An American newspaper subsequently used Prof Hawking as an example of the deficiencies of the NHS. "People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the UK, where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless," it claimed."

      I think a Babbage quote fits this best (slightly adapted):

      I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a statement.

    39. Re:Best care money can buy helps by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      >He also has access to an amazing amount of healthcare.

      True. But after 50 years with that disease I think the luck-factor is even more amazing.

      I think he saw that episode where Spock had his brain removed and installed in a giant computer that was used to run a whole planet and had worshipers and he thought "wow that's the life for me" then he found out he had ALS and then it was 'Just 5 more years to become the metroid'

    40. Re:Best care money can buy helps by willaien · · Score: 4, Informative

      His extensive care began when he was a nobody making no money. As mentioned by the telegraph piece linked several times.

    41. Re:Best care money can buy helps by adonoman · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're missing the GP's point - the US government already pays more for healthcare per citizen than most countries with single-payer universal health care. You don't need to redirect billions, there's already enough being spent to provide health care to every citizen in the US. We just need to dump the insurance bureaucracy that is costing so much overhead.

    42. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Urkki · · Score: 5, Insightful

      can't afford their own healthcare

      So your solution is to force others at gunpoint to do it? I'm all for helping others but making it mandatory is evil. The ends don't justify the means.

      IMNSHO, "help to maintain the society you live in, as agreed by the society collectively, while doing your small part to steer the society to the direction your want, or GTFO" is perfectly fair deal. From this follows, it's perfectly valid to decide on what needs to be done, then collect taxes to do it, even when "it" is public health care system. And, same as for example requiring kids to be taught to read and write, ultimately everything required by so called civilized society is "at gunpoint".

    43. Re:Best care money can buy helps by BStroms · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What's sad is when I see people of all stripes debating against public healthcare, forgetting that they're condemning future thinkers or leaders or writers just because they (or their families) can't afford their own healthcare.

      I'm normally a very staunch conservative, but healthcare is one of my most liberal viewpoints. Even so, public healthcare isn't necessary to fix the US system. Nor is it a solution by itself. Unless we fix the other major issues, it won't solve the insanely cost inefficient US system. Profits and executive salaries make for a very small fraction of health care cost. (I believe less than 5% combined, although I'd have to research the exact numbers again to confirm.) There are some big issues that need to be addressed however to reign in cost. All three of the following individually add more to costs than the evil profits and executive salaries combined.

      1. Wasted administrative costs - Centralize and standardize records, billing, procedure codes, pretty much everything you can. The process should be the same regardless of who your insurance is so less staff and training needed to handle all the different procedures.

      2. Lawsuits - The cost of this is twofold and huge. First there's the actual insurance costs, which for high risk practices like neurosurgery can be astronomical. Second is the overly defensive medicine practiced. Doctors will perform more expensive tests and scans even though they know there's no need for them just so that if something does come up down the road, they've covered their rears. Mistakes happen. Caps should be put on the size of payouts against doctors and they should only have any payout if gross negligence can be proven.

      3. Fraud - Whether it's homeless people calling 911 for free room and board for night and taking an ambulance to save on cab fair, or those leaving phony names and addresses with the emergency room to skip out on the bill, fraud adds significantly to cost. It can take up bed/staff/ambulance resources that can be needed in real emergencies as well. If we could properly deal with the homeless problem, it would solve part of the issue, and universal healthcare would solve more. No need to skip the bill if you're not paying. Still, we do need to go after and prosecute serial abusers of the system.

      Now, if you solve all the issues above, I think you'll find the cost efficiency of the US system will come more in line with other countries. Then you can solve the other gaping problems without bankrupting the nation. Obviously universal healthcare, but you don't need to make it public or single payer. First regulate standard coverage that [b]must[/b] be covered by all insurance providers. Then require everyone to purchase health insurance (the government subsidizes the cost for those of low income.) There's no denial for preexisting conditions, and no dropping people or refusing to pay the mandated coverage.

      Now, insurance companies can only compete it cost and value added services, such as covering no mandatory procedures like certain cosmetic surgeries or the like. You can even have nonprofit insurance organizes like co-ops compete with banks if people are really afraid of the cost of profits.

       

    44. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      It's folks that aren't poor but don't get benefits from other sources that are left out in the US. The poor and the elderly already have socialize medicine.

      Well, it's not the best total system, but it's a nice net to have. When I was suddenly unemployed for a few months a few years back, that socialized medicine got my kid a prescription he needed, free of charge, and paid our pediatrician (same one we normally use) for us.

      Ross Perot's "giant sucking sound" applies to a lot of things in the US economy, including your life's accumulated wealth when a couple of things go not according to plan.

    45. Re:Best care money can buy helps by iserlohn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the argument is that the existing privatised system enables the type of inefficient behavior you just described.

      In countries that perform better than the US in healthcare, even the non-fully-nationalised systems, the state plays a very big role in regulation and legislation to enable the type of efficiencies you described. However, to admit that there is a role for government is not in the playbook of American conservatives, because they are afraid to promote any idea that deviates from their "Government always leads to inefficiency" script.

    46. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MattskEE · · Score: 4, Informative

      I wonder how would a young 21 year old academic with ALS fare in the USA.

      US universities generally have great benefits for their employees (good health insurance policies) and tend to be pretty flexible with sick leave for professors

      21 year old academics (even Stephen Hawking) are not professors, they are undergrads or grad students, and they do not get professor-level health insurance plans from the university. I'm a grad student on my university's health insurance policy, it's not bad at least for routine care although the co-pays are higher than when I was on my parent's plan. It costs me a little over $2,200/year, which is admittedly much less than tuition. Sidenote: thanks to "Obamacare" it is much easier for kids to stay on their parents health insurance plan to an older age (26 I think?), which is great if (A) your parent has a job with health insurance and (B) putting you on your parents plan doesn't cost more than you and your parent can afford.

      The better question would be how would a young blue-collar worker with ALS fare. He would be completely screwed.

      Yep :(

    47. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm poor, but a single male, so there's actually no Medicare/Medicaid available to me in this state.

      I'm a contracted clerk for the state Medicaid system, so if there were a real option, I would've known about it by now. The closest available here are public clinics for the poor, mostly run by churches.

    48. Re:Best care money can buy helps by RingDev · · Score: 2

      21 year olds are still covered by their parent's insurance (Assuming the parents have insurance). 26 is the new cut off age. If you turn 27 and get diagnosed with cancer, you're likely not going to have great options.

      New job means crap benefits, but too much income to qualify for state plans.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    49. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's funny you mention that because I've lived both within the US and outside and have found the experience to be the opposite, in terms of how the patient is treated. Yes, there is more financial difficulty for Americans who aren't in a financially comfortable situation, but I've found the healthcare in the States to be consistently on par, if not better, to what you'll find in Europe and definitely superior to what you get in Asia.

    50. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sgt+scrub · · Score: 3, Informative

      Long version: $3,000/y medicaid, $6,000/y food stamps, and a free bus ticket. This is assuming he/she doesn't have a job. If they have a job the employers insurance company has to pay up to $3,000/y. They are out of pocket for medical expenses above $3,000/y either way.

      Short version: In a word fuckt.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    51. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is that 25 year olds are not "kids", and anyone in their mid-20s (presumably with a Bachelor's degree) should not be riding on the backs of the public.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    52. Re:Best care money can buy helps by pnutjam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was forced at gunpoint to wear clothes to work this morning, I feel your pain.
      I was also forced at gunpoint to drive the speed limit and slow down as I went through a school zone.

      Where are my rights!

      you can play too!

    53. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 5, Insightful
      What's sad is when I see people of all stripes who trot out straw men, assuming that there is no other way of paying for health care other than using the state to take the money from other people.

      thinkers or leaders or writers

      I'd prefer engineers, scientists, or artists. We're already doling it out to the politicians and liberal arts "Occupiers".

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    54. Re:Best care money can buy helps by rev0lt · · Score: 2

      Meanwhile while you're trying to engineer a perfect system, years go by and people die. Free (or close enough) universal healthcare is a reality in most civilized countries you can think of, and they're not bankrupt because of it. Most issues you mention have been solved for decades. Privatized healthcare also exists on those countries, and from my own experience and the people close to me, they couldn't care less about you when you stop being a walking money bag or demand too much work.

    55. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 1

      We have limited resources. The government will have to decide who lives and who dies at some point... along with who gets to have children, and what quality of life we can afford.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    56. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

      If you think social healthcare is a panacea you've got another thing coming.

      That's not to say I don't support the idea of socialized healthcare to some extent. But the problem is paying for it. Both in Europe and Asia the model is proving unsustainable. I've got two uncles in France who had to pick up private health insurance because of what the government has cut. Unless you've got the bulk of the population paying more into the system than they take out you're going to have problems. It's why Northern Europe and east Asia continue to have thriving programs. And even in Taiwan, Japan and South Korea they're facing problems because even though they've got a productive population they're suffering exceedingly low birthrates. And government can't control the cost of goods and services. Well, they can, but it introduces a whole host of other problems. In my experience American healthcare is more consistently good than I've seen anywhere else, in both Asia and Europe.

    57. Re:Best care money can buy helps by w_dragon · · Score: 1

      He has a position there, and he's visited once, but it's not something that required him to move to Canada.

    58. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Then why do we allow protest? Perhaps we should enforce the silence of the public "at gunpoint"... after all, they are impeding progress. Life, liberty, and property are outdated.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    59. Re:Best care money can buy helps by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      True, but in your examples those people were owned lock, stock, and barrel by the university. They could never go anywhere else because they wouldn't be able to get insurance. All it takes is one cost-cutting splurge and they are royally screwed.

    60. Re:Best care money can buy helps by FreeUser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Having lived in Germany, England, and the United States, and used all three, I can say that while the NHS may not be perfect, it is lightyears ahead of even top-end private care in the United States (which I've also used). The UK would be complete fools to follow the US model (as some conservatives in government seem to want). People complain about 2-week waits in the UK for elective non-life threatening procedures, while in the US somone in my family had to wait 6-8 weeks for an angiogram after failing an EKG and having acute symptoms of heart trouble, and another waited 5 weeks for an appointment with a neurologist after having what may have been a mild embolism, complete with excruciating headache and shockingly low body temperature.

      Americans who think our "free market ueber alles" system works better than Germany's strictly regulated market, or the UK's (or France's, or Canada's) are either idealogically blinded idiots, or have never taken a serious look beyond our borders. And I say that as one with a "cadallac" level of insurance in the US, which pales compared to what we had with the NHS when we lived in England (and what I received from the German system when I lived there).

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    61. Re:Best care money can buy helps by khipu · · Score: 1

      European-style health care was a good idea a century ago and worked well for a long time, but it is at the end of its life due to changing demographics and the way medicine itself is changing.

    62. Re:Best care money can buy helps by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      There is very good coverage in the US for kids whose parents are under a certain income threshold. It sucks to jump from that to $20 copays, $80 dental bills (after insurance), and 80/20 hospital bills. It's downright cippling when your pay is barely more then it was before. Your also locked out if your are "lucky" enough to be on a crappy healthcare plan when your income goes down. You can't drop insurance and then get the excellent gov. provided insurance for your kids.

      And God forbid you live in Texas or some similar hellhole.

    63. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JAlexoi · · Score: 2

      can't afford their own healthcare

      So your solution is to force others at gunpoint to do it? I'm all for helping others but making it mandatory is evil. The ends don't justify the means.

      You do understand that we actually are OK with paying for our socialized medicine, do you? Mostly because we know the downsides of the alternative. And yes, democracy is a bitch - the majority totally dominates the minority. With all of the negatives of socialised medicine, you will find absolutely small number of people think it should be scrapped for all private.
      Hell! My country has a mixed system that actually works well. With a single payer system I get about 20% of the money I pay into it. While my mother gets the rest 80%. In addition to being breast cancer survivor, where all of her treatments were paid by the government medical insurance.
      The value for the society in that? I am not bothered with medical bills and can easily focus on my work - thus bringing in more $$$ into my country.

    64. Re:Best care money can buy helps by mr_walrus · · Score: 1

      he's an honourary "chair" at the PI, but does not reside in Canada. he made one extended summer visit a couple years ago.
      another extended visit got cancelled due to some health issue or something. as a visitor he would not have to worry about
      "emergency" healthcare, but regular maintenance stuff he would have had to make his own arrangements.

    65. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Here's something to counter your anecdotes. For a prominent one, Terry Pratchett has early onset Alzheimer's but can't be put on medications for it because he's too young. That's bureaucrats overriding medical science. Socialized health care isn't interested in improving the quality of life. As a consequence, he will likely be taking his own life soon-- amusingly, in Switzerland. I guess assisted suicide isn't covered in the UK.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    66. Re:Best care money can buy helps by robthebloke · · Score: 1

      Yes, the National Health Service is wonderful. :p

    67. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      most countries with single-payer universal health care

      I think it's all, not most. Healthcare costs in US are out of control.

    68. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or does he just hate walking?

    69. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Medicare only pays if your 65 or older and is a supplimental insurance program. This will help you calculate the out of pocket costscalc info Medicaid has a limit specific to the level of disability and is dependant on the state you live in and your "countable resources". The medicaid process is:

      1) loose everything until you no longer own more than $2,000 in assets.
      2) file.
      3) wait 6 months.
      4) receive a maximum of $20,000 in total medical, foodstamps, transportation (bus ticket), and living expenses (nursing home) per year.
      5) show that you are actively looking for a job.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    70. Re:Best care money can buy helps by khipu · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What's sad is when I see people of all stripes debating against public healthcare

      What's sad is when well-meaning people push through quick fixes that are not sustainable, and then accuse others of ill will. Obama's health care plan (like NHS) has failure programmed into it: it simply is not sustainable.

      It's good that Obama's health care plan gets some people who have fallen through the cracks the help they need. You're a fool if you think his plan is sustainable. And you're a jerk for accusing others of not caring about the sick and dying.

    71. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Yet, he would be treated in any case, or wouldn't he be?

    72. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Depends on the insurance plan. I have a few friends that ended up owing 10's of thousands in hospital fees, even though they had insurance.
      But yeah... With great insurance policy you are golden in US.

    73. Re:Best care money can buy helps by BStroms · · Score: 1

      America is not Britain, France, Canada, Germany, or any other country. America has it's own citizens with their own culture and their own viewpoints. The fact that we haven't implemented any of the systems these other countries have is proof enough of that. Do you think it won't take years to get public healthcare pushed through? Or even a single payer system? America has too many people that fear big government electing too many politicians who share that view to replicate the system of any of these countries quickly.

      While I'll readily admit that some government control and regulation is necessary to fix the system, and described some I would support above, there are no shortage of people who won't make that admission. The less obvious government involvement there is in a proposed system, the more likely you are to be able to get it passed and have it survive legal challenges. It's not a question of coming up with the perfect system, or even the best system. It's a matter of tailoring a system for the US that's the best possible pill the country can actually swallow.

    74. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      You are lucky to live in a country with a great medical system, UK is less so. Though I heard of horror stories from all countries.

    75. Re:Best care money can buy helps by ShavedOrangutan · · Score: 1

      Nearly Every? Can you cite some examples?

      --
      Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
    76. Re:Best care money can buy helps by witherstaff · · Score: 1

      That's actually the reason I object to the current healthcare law in the US. The bill passed under Obama stops doctor owned hospitals, and also forces individuals to use private insurance. There's no reason to actually improve the horrors of the current system - bad coverage of insurance, overbilling, and make better hospitals. As we speak, I've been spending the last 3 weeks at a top hospital with a sick family member (Cleveland Clinic) because our local hospital gave a 'go home a die' diagnosis. Cleveland said they could do something. I'd like all hospitals to have better treatment and not have the gov't basically monopolize hospital regions by hindering new ones moving in competing.

    77. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Stenchwarrior · · Score: 2

      I've not had a ton of experience with the government supplied healthcare (other than what I get through the military, which is GREAT) so I never understand why people poo-poo the medical here. My wife had to get on Medicare because I lost my job and she was pregnant and NEEDED some type of coverage. The biggest change in how we were dealt with came from the doctors who seemingly looked down on us for having to have the "poor-peoples'" care. From what I understand that's only because Medicare has a lower reimbursement rate for procedures than some other private plans. So, less $ for the doctors means a lower level of care, even though they are really not supposed to do that...but it still was not "horrible"; we received medication, office visits and the c-section birth of our daughter went pretty smoothly. What am I missing?

      --
      Loading...
    78. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, that's American talk. You want to move somewhere vastly stupider if you want to think like that.

      Might be tough though... they reallllly hate immigrants from anywhere, and anyone with an accent.

    79. Re:Best care money can buy helps by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      While the Malthusian argument is logically sound, it only works when there truly are only limited resources. That has not been the case yet, and if we can get our thumbs out of our asses and get off this planet, it won't be the case for an astronomically long time, even with high population growth. And it's no reason to start having governments decide who lives and who dies now. That decision can easily wait until there really is a problem. Doing so beforehand tends to cause those decisions to be made using other-than-survival criteria anyway.

    80. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Urkki · · Score: 1

      "We" allow protests, because certain amount of freedom has proven to be a successful recipe. If it weren't, we might be living in a "communist" society after cold war would have been won by the communist block (or something else).

      Also, allowing protests is generally good idea, because if they're not allowed, there's bound to be revolution attempts, and they tend to succeed, sooner or later.

      Grossly simplified, this is why we do allow protesting.

      Note: I'm not so much saying that public health care is the way to go (that's my personal opinion, but I recognize it as that), I'm saying that society has right decide that public health care is the way to go, and am happy to live in a society which has made that decision. I happen to think, that health care (which, essentially, should try to minimize need for itself, ie. keep people healthy) and corporate market economy (which, essentially, is faceless amoral entities seeking short term business growth by all means possible) are very hard to mix, due to conflicting goals.

    81. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      There is very good coverage in the US for kids whose parents are under a certain income threshold. It sucks to jump from that to $20 copays, $80 dental bills (after insurance), and 80/20 hospital bills. It's downright cippling when your pay is barely more then it was before. Your also locked out if your are "lucky" enough to be on a crappy healthcare plan when your income goes down. You can't drop insurance and then get the excellent gov. provided insurance for your kids.

      And God forbid you live in Texas or some similar hellhole.

      Been there, done that, left Texas when the company dropped Humana as a provider.

      Also lost Florida KidCare when I got my current job, I believe I am paying $12Kish per year out of pocket for my wife and 2 kids' sucky insurance that's got way more out of pocket component to it than KidCare had.

    82. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure, the US has awesome care if you are lucky enough to be able to afford it. But a HUGE chunk of the country isn't that lucky, and of the ones who can, they often pay a HUGE price to be able to afford it. And even then, once they've got it...yeah everything often goes great until things really get bad, and then that is when the insurance companies get creative in finding ways to cut you off.

    83. Re:Best care money can buy helps by ArcherB · · Score: 2

      . People complain about 2-week waits in the UK for elective non-life threatening procedures, while in the US somone in my family had to wait 6-8 weeks for an angiogram after failing an EKG and having acute symptoms of heart trouble, and another waited 5 weeks for an appointment with a neurologist after having what may have been a mild embolism, complete with excruciating headache and shockingly low body temperature.

      I had an eye issue. Photophobia and it felt like something was in my eye. I went to a clinic to have them check it out. They found what looked like a corneal ulcer, a condition that could lead to blindness if the conditions are right. I had to wait for an hour to see an eye doctor.

      My mother went to a doctor about a pain in her jaw when she walked in the morning. She had to schedule her appointment a week in advance as it was not an emergency, just jaw pain. During her appointment, the doctor suspected that the issue was heart related. She had to wait 30 minutes to see the cardiologist and another two days have the procedure to put the stints in. It probably took so long because the cardiologist is one of the best in the country.

      My daughter was recurring sinus issues. We had to schedule our doctor's appointment three days in advance. When surgery was required, we had to wait an entire week before they could perform the operation at the Children's hospital.

      I'm not saying that everyone has the same long wait times I had around the country. Some areas may be better than others. I'm also certain that our wait times would have been even longer if were not for the diligence of our doctors, who we take the time to build a relationship with, or our own persistence, some of those hour waits could have been days.

      Note: I'm in the US. I did not have insurance when I had the eye issue. It cost me about $200 total. My mother has her own insurance. My child was covered under my current, employee provided health insurance.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    84. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, they should just die, I suppose.

    85. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was forced at gunpoint to wear clothes to work this morning, I feel your pain.
        I was also forced at gunpoint to drive the speed limit and slow down as I went through a school zone.

      No you were not. You were free to do all those things and face the consequences. No police came to your house to check if you're dressed and surely no one followed you closely the minute you went faster.

    86. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      U.S. heathcare is only good for the rich.

      My daughter was having problems with her doctors for her pregnancy claiming they cant do more than 1 ultrasound by law, she fell down and they REFUSED to do an ultrasound to make sure the placenta did not tear away.

      I had her switch to my doctor who is a high cost doctor, but owns all the gear they use for Prenatal care. He took 15 minutes to check her out and give her another ultrasound to calm her fears. He also found that her iron levels were very low, something her Idiot doctor at the hospital could not be bothered to check.

      She is married to an army soldier so they dont make very much, only $21.00 an hour for him. They cant afford to go to a competent doctor so instead use one of the doctors that are based in the hospital.

      NOTE: my doctor is a very expensive one that has a lot of the equipment he owns and does outpatient surgury in his office, but he charged her NOTHING for a 1 hour personal visit on a weekend.

      American healthcare is crap, we have a lot of crap doctors and crap hospitals with a few of the good ones that actually went into medicine to help people. Couple that with corrupt Insurance companies dictating to Doctors and Hospitals as well as stupid laws and you get crapcare that is what we enjoy here.

      If you dont have a great job that has good healthcare insurance as well as a high paying job, you cant afford healthcare. With more than 50% of us making poverty level, no wonder that most of this country is fat, unhealthy, and not seeing a doctor regularly for health maintenance.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    87. Re:Best care money can buy helps by khallow · · Score: 1

      Or we can let the market decide in this "sucks to be you" example. My view is that if you're letting government routinely decide who lives and dies, then you're doing it wrong.

    88. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      No, I'm Canadian and decrying your attitude. But feel free to assume something different.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    89. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 1

      That might be because Obama cut funding to them when he signed the "Affordable health care art".

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    90. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proof of your claim of unsustainability? Sorry if I don't take the word of your conveniently placed "uncles". Also don't use the bailouts as excuse. The American healthcare is *not* a better system. It is more costly than the european system (in terms of % of GDP, according to OCDE) and it is not as good (according to WHO).

    91. Re:Best care money can buy helps by ediron2 · · Score: 1
      Has this hysterical gunpoint thing ever happened? If so, I wager it'd look a lot like on a reality show like 'Cops', where someone realizes they're about to be caught with outstanding warrants, or driving without a license or drunk or something else, and goes nutso trying to escape the cops, crashing through cars and driving against traffic, until it ends with them crumpled up and cops pointing guns at every direction. Or they'll wig out on a cop while far from their car, get tackled or tasered, then brought before a judge.

      -

      Point being, society knows this sort of treatment happens to scofflaws. Now, it seems like Bread and Circuses, but I'm more of the mind that folks witness these bad examples, then get very noticeable moments where a life decision needs to be made. At each, they're allowed to back away from teh crazy before it comes down to chases and guns and tasers. Laws and a self-govern-or-suffer motive work together as societal grease, smoothing things out before we all find ourselves hoarding ammo and believing some foreign muckraker's propaganda or faux news.

    92. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MikeBabcock · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You can call it a straw man just like you can claim I'm a jellyfish. But I'm not, and my comment wasn't.

      Welcome to reality, deal with it. You can either care for the sick or not. If you choose to care for them, you have to pay for it. If you have to pay for it, you must determine how. If you don't want to have the state pay for the the health of those who cannot afford it themselves, then you've chosen not to care for them.

      Next time, present a logical rebuttal.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    93. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      Ahem, I'm Canadian.

      Look it up, we live north of you.

      We argue about the cost of good healthcare every election, but taking it away from people isn't an option.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    94. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      As a Canadian watching your system from the outside, I'd be afraid of your politicians too. Our political system behind our public health system is completely different.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    95. Re:Best care money can buy helps by ediron2 · · Score: 1

      Oh, and for the record, agreeing as a society to fund what it takes so that people don't die in squalor is never evil.

    96. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While your assertion is true on its face, the fact of the matter is that there is a logical fallacy here. Worldwide healthcare costs would (and should) go up if the USA were to be actually fair, by removing reimportation bans on medications; as it currently stands we (the US) bear 100% of the development costs while the rest of the world - including all of the vaunted single-payer systems - pay only replication cost.

      Remove that crutch alone, and the cracks begin to show in your argument. I do not deny there are loads of bureaucrats that should be dumped for good, but few truly realize how inflated (by design) the prices we pay in the USA are. If those reimportation bans were not in place, all users of a given drug/innovation/compound would be forced to (rightly and reasonably) bear part of the burden for its R&D.

    97. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That makes you easier to dismiss. Canada has a population approximately 1/10 that of the U.S. They cannot push through a public system modeled on much smaller countries and expect it to be sustainable.

    98. Re:Best care money can buy helps by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      Do we need to spell EVERYTHING out for you?

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    99. Re:Best care money can buy helps by arkane1234 · · Score: 2

      Man, your boyfriends rough on you...

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    100. Re:Best care money can buy helps by BStroms · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is one of the arguments I like to use when someone is pushing single payer or public health. Just imagine you get the system exactly how you want it. Now the political winds shift as they always do. You don't even have to get too crazy. Just imagine the President/congress combination you've lived through that you hated the most. Now imagine what would happen if they were put in charge of your system.

      Even if the system has become so popular it'd be political suicide to roll major parts of it back, they can still choose exactly what's covered and to what extent. Who is denied coverage for this or that procedure on moral or financial grounds. Since they're the only game in town, now you have very few options. That's why I want to keep my options open rather than giving control to government.

    101. Re:Best care money can buy helps by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a brit.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    102. Re:Best care money can buy helps by compro01 · · Score: 4, Informative

      2. The cost of lawsuits is twofold and small. Texas has already tried imposing limits on medical lawsuits. The numbers of malpractice suits has fallen through the floor and malpractice insurance rates have also fallen. Actual medical costs have not and continue to grow at well above the national average.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    103. Re:Best care money can buy helps by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      I think we're talking about more than the last 3 years, which is how long Barrack Obama has been in presidential office.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    104. Re:Best care money can buy helps by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      We just need to dump the insurance bureaucracy that is costing so much overhead.

      THIS.

      We can debate "health care" all we want to, but the current political arguments in the U.S. have little to do with that.

      We're currently locked into a debate about whether people should have universal health insurance, which is not the same as health care. Granted, whether private business or government handles it, there will be some layer of bureaucracy. But anyone who thinks the current legislation to provide universal "health care" (i.e., insurance) won't be manipulated by the insurance industry to guarantee even greater future profits is hopelessly naive.

    105. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again no one is saying the system is perfect. You complain about strawman arguments and suddenly you use a site that cherry picks bad cases of NHS and proceeds to generalize the system's merit on those bad cases.

    106. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Just watch Jersey Shore for 2 minutes and tell me we shouldn't prioritize the thinkers at least a tiny bit, I fucking dare you.

      I'm not saying the world is ready for eugenics just yet, but maybe we could apply some social engineering to slightly decrease the life expectancy of the terminally stupid.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    107. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Capitalism says we have limited resources, but is there really a shortage of people who can help others ? Instead of hiding the medical practice behind the giant paywall that is med. school, maybe if you didn't need to be the son of a crooked senator to afford the damn piece of paper, we could crank out enough doctors to take care of everyone.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    108. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Nope. My wife has ALS and is on Medicare. It's specifically called out in the law as an exception to the "you must be 65" rule.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    109. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only person holding that gun against your temple is yourself, by living in a structured society. If you don't like paying taxes and being somewhat protected from the evils of the world, you can disappear into the forest and live like your ancestors.

      But, seeing as your last name is "Coward", I think you like the safety that social gun provides.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    110. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you dont have a great job that has good healthcare insurance as well as a high paying job, you cant afford healthcare. With more than 50% of us making poverty level, no wonder that most of this country is fat, unhealthy, and not seeing a doctor regularly for health maintenance.

      We're a third-world country that refuses to admit it.

    111. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's quite a policy reversal for Germany.

      Too soon?

    112. Re:Best care money can buy helps by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I don't think you should forget the high salaries of doctors. That will keep the price of medicine above that in many other countries, no matter what kind of reforms you make.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    113. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 1

      We allow protest because it gives enough of an illusion of freedom to safely maintain the tyranny.

      Or, if I dare use a movie reference, protesting is the Neo to our Matrix. It collects, vents, and ultimately disposes of, nonconforming elements.

      Just think of how protests work: certain highly-mobile people lead the movement, often labeled as "jobless hippies", or in more recent times "terrorists". The masses quietly signal their approval without actually doing anything. Nothing ever really changes, at least not for the better, but this ritual makes it appear as though people's voices are heard, which is enough to keep such cowards obedient and peaceful.

      If the establishment didn't allow protest, they couldn't call themselves a democracy at all. Then even the most hardcore bible-thumping shotgun-collecting cousin-fucker would realize it's just a old-fashioned fascist regime, and that would be a dangerous realization indeed.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    114. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Watching Jersey Shore for 2 minutes will turn any thinker into a non-thinker.

    115. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's NICE overriding no-one ...because they *are* a panel of medical experts ...

      They have not refused him because he is too young, they have refused him on the medical grounds that the drug has not been proven to work except in moderate stage patients, and when he gets that far (hopefully not for some time) will let him have it ...

      He is on medication, just not Aricept

      Assisted suicide is illegal in the UK ... Something Terry is campaigning to change

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    116. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2

      Yet, he would be treated in any case, or wouldn't he be?

      Yes, however, the care delivered under the Liverpool Care Pathway is pain medication while withholding food and fluids until the patient dies. Under a law passed sometime in the last ten years, this decision is entirely up to the doctors with any patient deemed "mentally deficient" (a determination usually made after they begin administering morphine) with family being subject to arrest if they provide fluids and/or food to the patient after the doctors have made such a determination (without need to consult with either the patient or the family).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    117. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if your parents are out of work or dead?

    118. Re:Best care money can buy helps by rev0lt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      America is not Britain, France, Canada, Germany, or any other country. America has it's own citizens with their own culture and their own viewpoints.

      That's part of the problem - America is run by big dollar companies, and has been for decades. There's no "citizenship" in politics, decisions are made by pouring money on the pockets of the right people - and it's all legal. In every other country, if that ever happended, would be considered a crime.
      The time it takes to get it done doesn't really matter, when you haven't started it yet.

    119. Re:Best care money can buy helps by dave420 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Riding on the backs of the public"? They're the future of the public, unless you want society to be full of people without college degrees. Your view of society is ridiculously selfish and short-sighted. No wonder you think the way you do.

    120. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Buddy, even when you play nice, even play by the rules, sometimes it gets uglier than "Cops: Too Hot for TV". You refuse to instate socialized healthcare because of those mythical "death panels", yet any half-witted thug that manages to reach adulthood without a criminal record can go to police college, be given a weapon, a badge, an inflated sense of self-worth, and a salary so low it ensures their allegiance to the underworld to make ends meet.

      You can have your cowboy cops. I'll keep my socialized healthcare and life long enough to watch you free market crazies crumble under the weight of your egos like Caesar's Rome.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    121. Re:Best care money can buy helps by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      What am I missing?

      You're missing the propaganda which gets fed to the rest of the world, thanks largely to people like Michael Moore and other far-left American activists. Here in Canada it seems to be an article of faith that American hospitals leave people to die in the gutter unless they have insurance or cash on hand.

    122. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Socialized health care isn't interested in improving the quality of life.

      And american health care isn't interested in anything but taking all of the money from your pockets. And then taking your pockets. And then taking your pants. And then finding absolutely any reason at all to deny you care if you have insurance, or tripling the amount the insurance company would have been charged if you don't.

      I guess assisted suicide isn't covered in the UK.

      More like illegal? Try that in the US and see what happens.

    123. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Burning1 · · Score: 1

      When you put executive salary as a percentage of an industry, it doesn't sound like so much, but the Medical industry is truly staggering in it's size - according to Wikipedia, we spent $2.26 trillion dollars on health care, which, by your figure would suggest that executive salary for that industry consumes 113 billion dollars.

      According to this article (the first one I found on the subject via Google) a typical figure for corporate America is for executive pay to be 2.4 percent of the net income. So, it seems like we can do better there.

      To address some other points:

      1. Agreed that administrative costs can go down. The figure I've heard is that the insurance industry carries a 20% overhead above what's paid out to policy holders. It's worth noting that if medical care was socialized and nothing else changed, that's 200 billion dollars we could put into paying down national debt.

      2. Lawsuits are as much an issue of public perception as anything. I think most people believe frivilous suits are wrong, but most would jump at an opportunity to be compensated when someone is injured or killed. IMO, the people complaining about the situation and wrongly citing McDonalds cases are as much to blame as anyone. The law as written is actually pretty good in this area, and changing public perception (building the perception that there isn't a lot of free money to be made here) would do a lot to cut down on frivolous suits.

      3. Socialized medicine, drug law reform, and welfare would do a *lot* to cut down on that kind of fraud. When a homless guy can get a meal and a warm bed in a shelter, he's a lot less likely to abuse a hospital. When a druggie can get their fix through legal means, they are a lot less likely to waste $1000 in diagnostics to get some pills. When medicine is free, treating a poor guy who has no means to pay is no longer fraud. I think the ends justify the means here.

      A friend of mine had a good suggestion for fixing privatized medicine: make it illegal to cherry pick. A healthy young guy gets the same rates as an old cancer survivor. Relative rates go up for us when we're young and able to earn, and down when we're older and need the coverage. And it becomes within the means of an individual to buy a policy (whereas now it's very expensive unless you're part of a group policy.)

    124. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll take a big inefficient government that saves my life, over a small government that puts my fate in the hands of insurance companies.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    125. Re:Best care money can buy helps by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      It could also be that his mind is quite active. A lot of people in his condition would be waiting to die, So they end up doing so sooner then later. Dr. Hawkings is still using his mind and being active member of society besides his condition.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    126. Re:Best care money can buy helps by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      NHS 1948 -2012 still going, what part of sustainable is the issue ...most of Europe have similar systems and they seem to be doing fine ...

      Obama's plan is a half-baked compromise, but is better then nothing (but not much better)

      The real problem is that in the USA Social = Communist, and the Healthcare industry is so entrenched that they are impossible to move ...

      The rest of the civilised world have a population that are capable of working when they have curable diseases, the US has people claiming handouts from the government when they could work but can't afford medical costs ...

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    127. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      I had a discussion with my father on this subject.

      He has Cataract's and we're trying to get him the care he needs (my whole family is uninsured). We just missed a free local program that fixes Cataract's because they elected to announce it on the news by saying "Today they fixed Cataract's for free - one day only and it's already over! Woo!".

      One of his friends is a British expatriate who was telling him how NHS would probably cover him if he lived in Britain. "They pay taxes out the ass, though," so says my dad.

      "So do we," I replied. "At least the Brits get their money's worth."

      Incidentally, if anyone near Newark, NJ is willing to skillfully fire some lasers into my dad's eyes pro bono so he can actually see and work again, I'd appreciate a reply to this comment or an e-mail being sent my way. Searches for charity care in this regard have been difficult to say the least.

    128. Re:Best care money can buy helps by maple_shaft · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've not had a ton of experience with the government supplied healthcare.

      other than what I get through the military, which is GREAT

      My wife had to get on Medicare because I lost my job and she was pregnant and NEEDED some type of coverage

      Maybe I am missing something but both military healtchcare including the VA and Medicare are both essentially government provided healthcare. Of course the military healthcare is top-notch, our boys in uniform putting themselves in harms way deserve no less. Medicare for your wife too means it is government subsidized so while they pay out lower to providers you have the security of knowing that some scheming health insurance company isn't going to try and find a way to deny you coverage. Medicare will always be there (for the near future at least).

      I am fortunate enough to have a good job which provides me private health insurance and the care I get is excellent but what really sucks about private health insurance for most people is that they live in fear of being dropped or priced out of the plan if they end up needing it too much. The appeal of a nationalized system to me is that I don't have to worry about engaging in grueling battles over the phone with insurance companies for tens of thousands of dollars when they just decide that they are not going to pay for your medical bills. Thats BS, in a civilized society I should be able to go to the hospital, leave after treatment and go on with my life. I would gladly pay higher taxes for that kind of luxury than live in fear that going to the hospital for a major problem could result in my going bankrupt.

    129. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 1

      This. As much as I despise Harper for being a hypocritical sell-out, at least he's consistent. Watching U.S. presidential races is like Fox Jersey Shore Survivor Race Idol: bunch of babbling idiots all trying to out-retard each other, while the audience wonders what kind of lax breeding history would result in such weak sperm beating its peers to the egg. Yeah, we have our crazies in all parties, but none of them come anywhere near the level of obstinate stupidity displayed by characters such as Palin, Bachmann, Cain, Romney, Santorum and Perry. If that is the best the nation has to offer, then the political system needs the mother of all overhauls or else the U.S. is doomed to collapse.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    130. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Bucky24 · · Score: 4, Informative

      American hospitals leave people to die in the gutter unless they have insurance or cash on hand.

      No, it's quite the opposite. American hospitals are not allowed to turn people away just because they can't pay. They are forced by law to admit them and treat them, then release them. This used to be mostly illegal immigrants, but now is growing to include American citizens who just don't have insurance and can't afford the bills. To make ends meet, hospitals then have to jack up the prices on the people who CAN pay, which increases insurance costs, which then increases our premiums. It's a vicious cycle.

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    131. Re:Best care money can buy helps by maple_shaft · · Score: 1

      can't afford their own healthcare

      So your solution is to force others at gunpoint to do it? I'm all for helping others but making it mandatory is evil. The ends don't justify the means.

      Letting your fellow countrymen die on the street from wholly preventable conditions is a worse evil.

    132. Re:Best care money can buy helps by rev0lt · · Score: 1

      On other countries, people don't live scared by their government. Usually most fundamental laws are written in the country's constitution (and access to universal healthcare is usually present), and to change it you'd need an astonishing majority (Where I live, you'd need 75% of 230 votes of the parliament, spanning 5 political parties), and even then, usually other powers can interfere, such as the president.
      On the other hand, I believe that the current bi-party state of affairs in american policy is a long way from being an actual democracy, but hey, I'm a cynical person.

    133. Re:Best care money can buy helps by maple_shaft · · Score: 1

      I just ran out mod points but PLEASE MOD PARENT UP!

    134. Re:Best care money can buy helps by maple_shaft · · Score: 1

      Doctor salaries are high because most are required to pay for their own malpractice insurance rates. Litigation reforms then would likely not have an effect on the overall cost of the system but realistically could give a very large implicit pay boost to existing doctors as their malpractice insurance rates plummet. This likely still would not affect in lower salaries, at least for many many years in the future as downward pressure on salaries tend not to occur to grandfathered professionals but new entrants into the field.

    135. Re:Best care money can buy helps by John+Napkintosh · · Score: 2

      True - I'm sure if we look hard enough, we could also find someone who would not be dead if not for the NHS.

      --

      Long signatures suck.
    136. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 2

      Really ? Why not ? Why does scale matter so much with healthcare ?

      More importantly: what do you consider "sustainable" ? What kind of price would you put on your own health ? How many costly medical procedures are caused by lack of preventive care ? How do you think that relates to crime levels ? Why is my life expectancy 3% higher than yours ?

      You know, we Canadians bitch and moan about long wait times, but we're quite grateful to have it when we need it, and I'd like to posit the theory that having public healthcare directly results in lower rates of violent crime, thanks to decreased stress. For most people, fear of death is the greatest fear of all, so having that fear mitigated by the government is a tremendous weight off our shoulders.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    137. Re:Best care money can buy helps by maple_shaft · · Score: 1

      Point 1 is a very real thing but we are a large very regional country after all. Great strides are being made to improve administrative inefficiencies. Point 3 is entirely moot as Fraud as you describe it could not exist by definition of what public healthcare would bring. The problem is that the cost that a public system would eat as a result of the homeless and poor is being pushed onto emergency rooms and healthcare providers. Running an emergency room is usually a big loss for a hospital because of this, so they charge more for procedures and visits to people who can legitimately pay, and a huge portion of this cost is paid for by insurance anyways. Healthcare is so much more expensive than it really needs to be because of this. Hosptials can still be profitable while cutting price for procedures and visits across the board if they could operate an emergency room in the black.

    138. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's amazing listening to Americans discuss the care of people with medical conditions. They just have... no... idea.

      No idea about what? Did you forget to finish your sentence?

    139. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny when Non-Americans realize the research for the medicine they are enjoying, and in many cases the medicine itself, is subsidized by Americans.

      The American system is so awesome; I pay between 1/3rd and 1/5th of my income to insure myself (Next time you get let go ask them for COBRA Coverage; they'll give you the price the company was paying). The insurance companies end up getting over-charged by hospitals and doctors because they're required by law to cover the uninsured, and because of that, get to do things that are illegal in any other industry like billing services for the uninsured to other accounts.

      If I decided "hey this is BS" and decided to pay for it all myself, well, the moment I go to the doctor for a headache I've got to hire an attorney to deal with debt collectors for the $5,000 charge. Doctors bills are the equivelant of requests for Charity in the US, but come in the form of a bill which, if left unpaid, resutls in demands from lawyers and the eventual sale of the debt to a debt collector.

      Had a buddy go to the doctor for kidney stones; 10k later and after the insurance cut them off he started getting debt collection notices. His credit rating is ruined because of it. Heaven forbid I break a leg or throw out my back and decide to pay them in cash; I'd get bills for 10 years.

      Of course the Pig is going to think the food in the Trof is great when he isn't paying for it; When your nationalized Healthcare system produces research and advancement and can pay for itself, come let me know.

    140. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 5, Informative

      Meanwhile in Canada:

      When my wife was pregnant with our first kid, there were some complications. We ended up getting a dozen ultrasounds over the course of the pregnancy. It cost us a total of $10 for the printouts, and those were optional. The first us was at 10 weeks when she looked like a little gummy bear. (She'll be 8 in 4 weeks.) The second kid had the same set of concerns so we get another dozen ultrasounds. (He'll be 6 in a few months.) Both times the complication was pre-eclampsia, excess fluid, and they were both too big so we got C-sections. (4.5kg, 38cm head circumference) For the first, the doctors used prostaglandin and oxytocin to induce labour, but it wouldn't work so we moved to an emergency c-section. The boy was late, so VBAC was canceled and we got another c-section.

      Total cost, including hospital stay: $0.

      I get my iron levels checked routinely, I've got my annual physical coming up (I call to make the appointment on my birthday) and it's 100% covered including any bloodwork. My wife gets several hormone levels and her iron levels checked on a regular basis too.

      Now, it's not all free. We pay $120 a month for our family coverage. It covers basic services but not ambulance rides. (Some people were using them for taxis, so they put in a $65 fee for ambulance pickup. They bill you later, you don't have to whip out the traveller's cheques to get in like the time we my brother got hurt in the US.)

      One time the kids got hit by a car and we were about 300m from the ambulance dispatch station. There was another family there, and I think the dispatcher said "send everybody...everybody" and everybody came. Five ambulances, less than a minute. The stroller was destroyed, the kids were rushed to the hospital, scanned and examined, and released that night. They even brought them stuffies to play with and keep them happy. (To this day we celebrate the stuffies' birthday.)

      Total cost: $65 for the ambulance ride.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    141. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Rebelgecko · · Score: 1

      I don't know the details of how TRICARE works, but shouldn't that cover her?

      --
      CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
    142. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the case of when they looked at the Canadian plan (which, while not without its flaws, no one in the plan would give up), they basically went into 'denial' mode. They refused to accept what happens to 99.9% of the people, and would single out the 0.1% where things didn't work as well. Then they sent in reporters to those 0.1% of events, wrote a lot of charged dialogue, made what they filmed look like a cross between North Korean propaganda and a 1950's B movie (complete with the use of fish-eye lenses and everything), and then put it on Faux News. Americans will cheer Henry Ford for creating the production line and ushering in economics of scale. Those same Americans will gnash their teeth and bash public health care (which bring in similar economies of scale) because they think its 'communist' or some other kind of rubbish. Mostly the ones cheerleading the bashing are private insurance companies that make millions by taking healthy peoples money for years, but dropping them like a hot potato when they get sick. American health insurance being but one legalized form of fraud the United States allows.

    143. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, we should blame our free education system or the free childcare or the unemployment protection or... The list goes on and it is all absolutely worth it!

    144. Re:Best care money can buy helps by guises · · Score: 1

      If you qualify for public healthcare (Medicare) then it's okay. Like you said, not great but functional most of the time. The big issue is for people who have jobs and don't qualify, but who aren't rich - a medical emergency which isn't covered by their insurance, if they have insurance, will easily bankrupt any middle class family.

    145. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Steven Hawking would get the best possible care anywhere he went in the world. No health insurer, no government in the world would want the bad PR associated from killing one of the greatest minds in world to save a few bucks. The few bucks giving him ANYTHING he needed would be a drop in the bucket next to the PR disaster of losing him from something that was avoidable. Then there is the PR benefit from having on your plan and saying a few nice words about you. That's easily worth a few million right there.

    146. Re:Best care money can buy helps by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Ron Paul provided free medical care to patients who couldn't afford his services and he never accepted a penny from Medicare in his practice.

      Even before he had his own practice, back in 1972 he helped people who weren't helped by the system and took care of their bills. Black people, and that's a guy who is labeled a 'racist' today by the MSM.

      So instead of creating giant bureaucracies that end up destroying the economies and under the barrel of a government gun forcing everybody to participate in something that can actually do on their own, with donations or work, how about we let the people truly decide if they care about others?

      Yes, the individuals deciding what and when they do on their own in their own lives. What a novel and a radical concept.

    147. Re:Best care money can buy helps by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      False choice.

      It's not only a choice between: do what your gov't forces you under the gun point or GTFO.

      There is another choice - fuck the government and the horse it rode in on. It's up to the individuals to make individual choices and to help those they want to help without being forced by the guns of gov't officials.

      Ron Paul 2012.

    148. Re:Best care money can buy helps by rollingcalf · · Score: 1

      "Sidenote: thanks to "Obamacare" it is much easier for kids to stay on their parents health insurance plan to an older age (26 I think?), which is great if (A) your parent has a job with health insurance and (B) putting you on your parents plan doesn't cost more than you and your parent can afford."

      There is also the aspect of preexisting conditions. Somebody who picked up a major illness or injury while covered under their parent's policy would get rejected whenever they try to get a policy on their own, as the insurers would regard their illness/injury as a preexisting condition. Raising the age cutoff to 26 gives them more time to get a job that's good enough to offer health benefits (since employer group policies don't reject individual employees for preexisting conditions).

      However, I think it would have been better to have a lower cutoff like 22, but make it illegal for insurers to disqualify for preexisting conditions when an individual is converting from dependent coverage to their own individual policy.

      --
      ---------
      There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
    149. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Yes it covers her but barely. If the doctor does not take tricare like most of the better ones, you are stuck with the cheapies that dont want to do crap and only spend 5 minutes with you.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    150. Re:Best care money can buy helps by rhakka · · Score: 5, Insightful

      if individual charity was adequate to solve these kinds of societal problems we wouldn't be having this debate because the problem would already be solved. Obviously there are not enough Ron Pauls out there to solve it through their own selflessness.

    151. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      My doctor's opinion overlaps with your post.

      He says
      o excessive testing
      o insurance company overhead
      o drug prices

      That last is not explained by R&D expenses, high as those are. Drug companies spend more on marketing than on R&D. Further, he's seen a drug company take a drug that's already been developed and double the price on it.

      He wants single payer.

    152. Re:Best care money can buy helps by roman_mir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, that's not obvious at all.

      What IS obvious is that where there is an opportunity for a government to grab some power by instituting some new program under the guise of helping society somehow, the government will grab that power, will grab money for that power and eventually will destroy the very system that it set off to 'save' from a non-existing threat.

      Gov't money is what is causing rise of prices in education, health care, houses, and all things now, that the USD and bonds are the current debt bubble being inflated.

      It's not for the lack of charitable people or lack of doctors only charging what patients can pay.

      It's gov't money, which come with regulations, that create monopolies, which lock out competition, including monopolies on health care, health insurance (which should be insurance and not managed health accounts, as they are now). People used to pay doctors out of pocket because the costs were low and falling, then came in government to fix an non-existing problem.

      The consequences are here now.

    153. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 1

      Nor should the healthcare industry be riding on the back of a 26 year old.

    154. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      >equally astounding that his will to continue working in the face of losing all motor control has not been fazed.

      For people like him, their work is their life.

    155. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      I've known some people on Medicaid.

      Perhaps when you said "easier" you meant that it's easier than to get health insurance with a working-class or lower-middle-class job?

    156. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 3, Informative

      Except that even with all of that taken into account, we still spend WAY more on healthcare (per capita) than any other western nation but consistently get worse outcomes.

    157. Re:Best care money can buy helps by expatriot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I grew up in the US and now live in the UK.

      If you have money (or very good insurance) the US system is slightly better. It is always faster for non-urgent care and almost always faster for urgent care.

      I, like my relatives in France, have additional insurance. BUPA in my case ensures that any referral from my local doctor is seen quickly and I have a private room if I have an operation.

      To me that seems like a good compromise. Good basic care for everyone and extra payments will get you more convenience.

      I have some direct experience of what medical care is like in the US if you do not have very good insurance. I would not wish that on an enemy.

    158. Re:Best care money can buy helps by eldepeche · · Score: 1

      Assisted suicide is legal in Oregon, Washington and Montana. In Oregon and Washington, it was approved by voters directly (1994 and 1997 in Oregon, and 2009 in Washington), and in Montana, it was established in a state Supreme Court ruling that nothing in the state Constitution nor in statute prohibited physician aid in dying.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_suicide#United_States

    159. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 1

      I keep hearing that, but then I keep hearing how unemployment is too high. It seems our system is not actually very efficient at allocating idle resources to unmet demand.

    160. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 1

      Issue 2 is in part because we have no effective social safety net. People who have debilitating accidents or disease are forced to either find someone to pin it on or live the rest of their life in squalor.

    161. Re:Best care money can buy helps by eldepeche · · Score: 1

      1. Administrative costs are part of the problem, and the PPACA, or "ObamaCare," caps them at 15%.

      2. Lawsuits are a minuscule part of the problem. As another commenter said, Texas placed strict limits on malpractice lawsuits, and they had basically no change in either the level of cost or the rate of cost growth.

      3. You're just taking anecdotes and pretending they are systemic issues. Homeless people staying in the hospital for free? Using an ambulance to get to the neighborhood near the hospital? This has to be a joke.

      You could solve all these problems without making a dent in the overall rate of medical inflation. Without reducing payments to providers and hospitals, and incentivizing cost-effective treatments (including research on comparative effectiveness, which Medicare is currently prohibited from performing), you'll continue to see more of the same.

    162. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is obvious, unless you are delusional.

      I've seen your comment history - you are delusional.

    163. Re:Best care money can buy helps by eldepeche · · Score: 1

      These systems cost less than what the US government currently spends on health care. Meanwhile, we also have the huge amount spent by employers and individuals that gets us NO BENEFIT in terms of health outcomes.

    164. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 1

      No, it isn't any of those other countries. Instead, it is a country that cannot set aside crazy ideology in favor of a system that works.

      What we need is one of those silent majority moments.

    165. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 2

      The problems with Obamacare have nothing to do with well meaning people. The Republican opposition filled what was a sensible plan full of poison pills and the Democrats won the rubber spine award again.

      And frankly, I'd say many of them don't actually care if people die in screaming agony as long as they don't know them personally and someone tosses the corpses into the truck before they have to see them.

    166. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's quite the opposite. American hospitals are not allowed to turn people away just because they can't pay. They are forced by law to admit them and treat them, then release them. This used to be mostly illegal immigrants, but now is growing to include American citizens who just don't have insurance and can't afford the bills. To make ends meet, hospitals then have to jack up the prices on the people who CAN pay, which increases insurance costs, which then increases our premiums. It's a vicious cycle.

      Also increases cost of treatment tremendously because people have to wait until a condition is fairly severe before they qualify for (free) emergency room treatment.

    167. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 2

      We probably spend nearly as much on making sure people don't get free healthcare they're 'not entitled to' as other countries spend on taking care of people.

    168. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that then they bill those people who they didn't turn away and when they can't pay, it gets turned over to collection agencies.

    169. Re:Best care money can buy helps by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 1

      There is another choice - fuck the government and the horse it rode in on. It's up to the individuals to make individual choices and to help those they want to help without being forced by the guns of gov't officials.

      Well good luck because the richest of the rich only want to help each other and they'll be to the ones who own all the schools, roads, utilities, and hospitals when the government sells them off to the highest bidder in response to a 100% libertarian Congress and President. There have been thousands of every-man-for-himself societies in the past and every one of them has been a despotic shithole. Don't forget that the golden age of American Expansionism where some libertarian ideals almost worked was at the expense of native people who had been forming cohesive societies for centuries. There's no more West to travel into and carve out your homestead; you live in a slightly younger version of Europe now.

    170. Re:Best care money can buy helps by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      The big issue is for people who have jobs and don't qualify, but who aren't rich - a medical emergency which isn't covered by their insurance, if they have insurance, will easily bankrupt any middle class family.

      And then they'll qualify for medicare! It's a self-correcting problem, right? :p

    171. Re:Best care money can buy helps by houghi · · Score: 1

      When I see a show like "Extreme Makeover: Home edition" I am happy that so many people are willing to volunteer to build a home for somebody. I am sad to see that such a show is possible.

      A friend of mine had a mom with MS. She had everything she needed, including a home, most bills payed for and what not.

      Yes, she died, but there was no financial pain for family.

      I had a co worked who had cancer. No need to cook meth to pay his bills. Just went to the hospital each week to get his treatment.

      I might never need it and in the whole I might even pay more then I get, but I could not look these people in the eye and say: die a painful death so I can have a new cellphone.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    172. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, but he wouldn't have even gotten a chance to do that without universal health care. Sometimes doing the right thing pays of handsomely.

      In the U.S. he would probably have never had the opportunity to make his contributions.

    173. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 2

      The basic idea of having and maintaining a nation is based on people working together.

      The crushing-our-enemies bit surely can't be all we aspire to?

      And how on earth does this demand/supply thing in Capitalism work? We don't have enough people who work in healthcare. Do we
      a)increase the price
      or
      b)see the market opportunity and send our kids into med school

      The whole notion that medical treatment is a limited resource is preposterous. Wake me up when 75% of the population need immediate medical attention and the other 25% work in healthcare. This is not a battlefield where you do only have limited medical attention to give. This is supposed to be a self balancing system. And in some way it is because everybody has the right to choose his own profession. This is not a huge issue even with the access to training for such a profession or even qualifying for the training not being equally distributed. But even if the situation is not ideal you will only get the old paint-an-x-on-his-forehead-and shove-him-into-the-broom-cabinet treatment in case of a real and MASSIVE disaster of epic proportions. You'd notice it.

      I think the current discussion about health care has taken a turn towards the outright despicable within the US. Especially the rumor of "death panels" is very, very nasty indeed. Nobody gets the triage treatment. Not now not ever. That would be a matter of national shame. How come that all political campaigns are fear based at the moment? Has the US become a nation of whimps?

      Hint: it has not. This fear mongering isn't striking a chord with most US citizens when they see the effect it has.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    174. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      We allow protest so democracy doesn't become a dictatorship of the majority.

      Every voice must be heard and if the concerns are valid(as opposed to vapid) then they need to be taken into account.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    175. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      True that. Even the arch-socialist Germany has two healthcare schemes. One is for the masses and based on your status and income income and heavily, heavily regulated. The other one is actually commercial. As in: in the business of making money. Warts and all.

      Having either of the two is mandatory.
      Both have one thing in common: sharing the load on as many shoulders as possible.


      And I will spell it out since it is a popular myth: refusing treatment for a life threatening condition is actually a criminal offense in the US. Don't expect to be treated too kindly if you are convicted of something like that. Same goes for simply stepping over somebody who is dying in a gutter.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    176. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the only intellectual lens you own is a hammer, everything looks like a big government nail, doesn't it?

      So when I'm rushed to the nearest ER I should have several teams of doctors advertising their services? "Low rates! Easy credit opportunities! Buy Fraudco now! Your money or your life!" How exactly is the free market supposed to step in there?

      Very few people are able to earn income to pay for their hospital stay while they're in a hospital. The costs for that are already borne by society; have you ever had a family member require long term hospital care? Did they pay for it themselves, out of pocket? These people are a drain on the economy. They're not being productive, they're a broken window! You know about that particular fallacy, right?

      Health care should not be a competitive market. My being ill or injured should not be an opportunity for you to make profit. You seem to have the idea that it's a good thing that the cost of health care be low: that's not very capitalistic of you, is it? The free market would suggest that you should charge what the market can bear. In the case of life-threatening illness, this means not only all the money you have, but all the money your family has. Guess what? Your perfect world already exists.

      The governement intervention that started this was the creation of the first HMOs. By Nixon. Because the alternative sounded 'too communist'. This was the government letting loose the floodgates on what private insurance companies could do. No matter how many times the 'free market' fails you, you'll always find some nutcase reason to lick its bootheels. Plutocracy uber alles!

    177. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Letting your fellow countrymen die on the street from wholly preventable conditions is a worse evil.

      ...and a criminal offence, actually.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    178. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not quite true. American hospitals have to admit people who are in immediate need of care. This includes accident victims, end-stage terminal disease patients, etc. It does not include people who need care, but are not likely to die soon if they don't receive it. That's why we have people like cancer patients going either bankrupt or untreated until it is too late.

      Fixed for the international audience.

    179. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Zymophideth · · Score: 1

      If she is married to someone in the Army then all her medical is covered by the government, but yes they have restrictions on what services they provided. What you are explaining is the main reason some people fear U.S. Government run health care, they already do it for the military and it's a joke. I know you didn't state that you want Government run healthcare but I can see many individuals drawing that conclusion based on your post.

    180. Re:Best care money can buy helps by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Well good luck because the richest of the rich only want to help each other

      - makes sense. But if the richest of the rich are that rich because they stole money from people through their connection to the federal and state government, and they are getting free money from the Federal reserve and they are getting government contracts, then those are the people you want to kick out of the government structures, and that's not going to happen at all ever until the government is forced *by force, be it elections or violence* to return to obeying the law, and Constitution is the law that prevents individuals from being abused by government growth, and gov't taking over individual's lives, liberty and property.

      Rich people who make it by providing services and products need to be encouraged to do business in your economy, not discouraged.

      Rich people who get their money from the government in the first place, be it by contracts or be it by federal reserve or be it by illegal wars etc.etc., those need to be kicked out and gov't power needs to be reduced to only do what it is allowed to do.

      As to 'schools, roads, utilities' - the time after US Civil war and before the 1913 shows that growth of overall strength of economy lifts all boats. You want more people to become rich, not the other way around, because wealth is savings and it's what allows more investment, including all investments that deal with infrastructure and education and transport and health and food, etc.

      The rich also want to become richer, so that's why they invest all of the money they don't use into new businesses, but as long as the only business that is profitable is government business and free money, that's where all of the investments will be made and it will crash the real economy.

    181. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah its amazing how many of the filthy rich come to the US for their health care..

    182. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Oh wow!

      I can't mod since I've been posting here but this is the single most insightful thing said on that topic.

      And also quite obvious.
      The current debate with all of its shrill overtones are just teething problems. There is no doubt there will be something changed in the long term. But it will be a US solution. Unique, flawed and functional as in any western country.
      Will you get to choose if you join some healthcare system or not? Propably.
      Even if you are too poor to afford it? Certainly.
      Will you die in the gutter if you don't? Certainly not.
      Will you be bankrupt? Propably.

      Health insurance is not an insurance to be properly cared for. This isn't the dark ages! If it were then it would be a matter of national shame. And it would make national headlines.
      It's an insurance not to go bankrupt. That's all there is to it. Same as any insurance since the history of forever.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    183. Re:Best care money can buy helps by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      If it works, then why do people from countries with socialized medicine keep coming to the U.S. for surgery?

    184. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Zymophideth · · Score: 1

      Everyone I've talked to that is in the U.S. military says the healthcare sucks, it's just free. I've definitely never heard it called "top-notch." And the U.S. has a pretty good track record of screwing over their veterans.

    185. Re:Best care money can buy helps by mike1210 · · Score: 0

      No doubt Stephen Hawking has private health coverage as well. There's no way he's going to let himself die in an NHS hospital, though he should be required to.

    186. Re:Best care money can buy helps by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile in Canada:

      But what is your total tax rate?

    187. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      It is.
      That's why for the past 20 years there have been huge, grueling and major changes at least in Germany and the UK.
      Especially in Germany everything no matter how minute is covered by a catalogue of measures, how long they should take and how much they do cost. I double dare you to try to implement something like this in the US. You'd be shot way before dawn.
      While the necessity for some kind of change in the wake of changing demographics was undisputed we of course had a tremendous row over it. And don't think the tone was not as shrill as in the US.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    188. Re:Best care money can buy helps by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      I was forced at gunpoint to wear clothes to work this morning, I feel your pain.

      Ridiculous. You chose to have the job. You could leave if you don't like the the 'requirements'.

      I was also forced at gunpoint to drive the speed limit and slow down as I went through a school zone.

      Ridiculous. Driving a car is a privilege, not a right. Thus, you are required, subject to the penalties described in the various laws, to follow the rules.

    189. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      But even a not-great one routinely outperforms the US system. There are horror stories to be found in both, but they're a lot easier to find in the US.

      At a friend's wedding, I was seated next to a doctor from the UK. She made one comment or another about the healthcare system in the US, and since it was during the huge fight trying to get ObamaCare passed, I mentioned that we were probably going to have a system more like NHS soon. As though I had any control over the matter, she advised us not to do this based on the her experience with her practice.

      She told me that every few months, she'll have someone show up begging for one random service or another for cash, outside of NHS. One time it was getting an MRI read. Other times it's some diagnostic or another. I don't remember other examples. Anyway, she invariably turns them down. They plead that they can't get the care that they need through NHS. That they are desperate, but she has to turn them down because it would be illegal for her to provide service to people. After all, she is a Veterinarian.

      Now I know that Brits have their sense of humor, and I'll be the first to admit that she may have been having a little fun with me, but she looked serious to my eyes. It sounds ridiculous, obviously, but is it much more ridiculous than wealthy Canadians seeking treatment at Mayo in Rochester, MN because they can't get the health care that they need under the Canadian system? That I know is true, as I grew up in the area.

      I guess these are examples of systems that supposedly work, but I've never felt the need to seek treatment for any condition in Canada or, for that matter, at my dog's Vet.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    190. Re:Best care money can buy helps by BStroms · · Score: 1

      I find it hard to consider lawsuits a miniscule part of the problem, have a look at the following link if you disagree. http://www.aaos.org/news/aaosnow/dec10/advocacy2.asp

      I would like to highlight the following part in particular.

      In a recent Gallup survey, physicians attributed 34 percent of overall healthcare costs to defensive medicine and 21 percent of their practice to be defensive in nature. Specifically, they estimated that 35 percent of diagnostic tests, 29 percent of lab tests, 19 percent of hospitalizations, 14 percent of prescriptions, and 8 percent of surgeries were performed to avoid lawsuits.

      Liability reform has been estimated to result in anywhere from a 5 percent to a 34 percent reduction in medical expenditures by reducing defensive medicine practices, with estimates of savings from $54 billion to $650 billion.

      I don't know the details about the Texas case in particular, but the very article that gave these numbers mentions Texas and some of the benefits that occurred from the legislative changes. There are other explanations why it wouldn't make a dent in the rate of inflation other than the overall cost being miniscule. It's possible Texas had another area of cost that grew faster than other states and countered the effect. It's also possible that despite the change, doctors didn't change their practice of defensive medicine. Perhaps out of habit, lack of knowledge of the changes, or the changes being too small. I don't know enough to say.

      Your criticism of the fraud claim is much more deserved. The examples I gave were small and tended to focus only on the side of the little guy when fraud can also include things such as doctors, hospitals, and the like making fraudulent charges against insurance. I'm sure there are countless ways fraud occurs I haven't even thought of, much less mentioned. Overall though, the matter is far from a joke. The NPR estimated the cost of fraud in the US system at $60 billion to $600 billion a year. http://motherjones.com/mojo/2009/08/cost-medical-fraud-could-pay-health-care-reform

    191. Re:Best care money can buy helps by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Do you have any data to back up that claim?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    192. Re:Best care money can buy helps by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 1

      1. To be fair, every commercial insurance I've seen does accept the standard codes (ICD-9, ICD-10, CPT-4, etc.) and billing forms and electronic steams (UB's, HCFA's, 837/835's, 5010's, etc.) that Medicare does. The high bar is set by CMS, and it's probably a good thing that they do because it makes disease and treatment reporting statistics slightly more accurate and meaningful. Medical coding is just a very complex topic. Just try categorizing every possible medical diagnosis into 14567 codes (ICD-9, as of October 2011). It may be possible to simplify billing to some extent, for instance by reverting to a single payer, but a lot of the complexity is simply abiding by CMS's rules for documentation (the medical record must support every line item) and combining stays. Some organizations are trying HMO 2.0 where a payer just pays a lump sum based on the diagnosis and some additional factors (no line item billing), but unless that's done very carefully I don't see that ending well at all.

      2. Medical malpractice insurance is around 5 or 10 percent of total costs which is certainly high but probably not the biggest contributor to overall cost. Defensive procedures can also be blamed on patients who demand them instead of just trusting their doctors.

      3. Fraud is probably not as big a contributor towards total costs as you might think. While there is some overhead chasing bad debt and some abuse of unnecessary procedures, the vast majority of people don't want to be in the hospital unless they're actually sick. The costs are shifted to legitimate payers but the total national cost of healthcare is probably not too adversely inflated. By treating homelessness directly you probably would end up hospitalizing and treating most of those patients for mental health issues anyway.

      4. I'd add the cost of supplies to your list. Hospitals and clinics get soaked for everything from electronic devices to sterile pads. There's a high demand with only a few manufacturers and strict regulation but ultimately most patient-room medical devices shouldn't cost much more to manufacture than an iPad. Nationalizing drug development and testing would no doubt help defray another 5% to 15% of the total cost, not to mention helping the third world immensely.

      I think that ultimately health care costs have increased so much because we can cure and treat so much. Society is going to have to deal with the fact that longer, healthier lives are a cost-benefit decision and value SUVs and 3D TVs and $3,000,000 Superbowl commercials appropriately.

    193. Re:Best care money can buy helps by pnutjam · · Score: 2

      My post was sarcastic..

      the logic of the "forced at gunpoint to pay taxes crowd"
      1. don't pay taxes
      2. men with guns show up to arrest you.

      reality: 1. don't pay taxes
      2. notice of penalties (ignore)
      3. many more notices (ignore)
      4. served with papers (ignore)
      5. court date (ignore)
      6. arrested and put in prison (this is the gun step)


      --
      for comparison if I didn't wear clothes to work:
      1. funny looks from neighbors. (ignore)
      2. people point at me and stare as I get out of my car at work (ignore)
      3. someone probably asks if I realize I am naked (ignore)
      4. cops ask me to cover up, probably offer a blanket (ignore)
      5. tasering, beatdown, arrest.

      So both are very similar, If you are forced at gunpoint to pay taxes, I am forced at gunpoint to wear clothes.

    194. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      On the contrary. I think they still are kids.
      Think of the capacity for idiocy as a function over age. You'd get a huge increase during puberty, a slow decline at age 20 and a long tail after that.

      But at any point of time the capacity for idiocy never falls beneath 100%. We are born drooling idiots, we become blithering idiots, continue to be being grumpy idiots and end up being dead idiots(for which the accepted professional term seems to be "sadly misunderstood genius"). Having realized this fact of life the thought construct of "accountability" has been introduced. Which of course proves my earlier claim that we are idiots and embrace our idiocy and even codify the workarounds for our idiocy.

      So having some kind of safety net is indeed something that might be in order. Which you shouldn't view as riding on the back of the public since we all did this at one point. What comes around goes around.

      I think calling ourselves "homo sapiens"(or in the likelyhood of somebody protesting "hetero sapiens") might be wishful thinking.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    195. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Whoopsie daisy. Right reply to wrong comment.
      I'm such a moran.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    196. Re:Best care money can buy helps by KhabaLox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Citation needed. I often hear or see this claim made, but I've never seen any numbers or sources backing it up.

      However, assuming it is true, one possible explanation is that the very highest quality medical care is available at the very highest prices in the USA. Of course, this is completely irrelevant to the question of how best to provide health care to the population at large.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    197. Re:Best care money can buy helps by DMJC · · Score: 1

      You can't dodge a high tax rate when you're dead. Something to think about.... Americans place too high a value on money.

    198. Re:Best care money can buy helps by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 4, Informative
      Because they're rich and scared and will buy into the propaganda that says US medical care is better or they realise they're rich and want the pampered treatment you get in the US since you're paying through the nose or maybe the low value of the dollar makes it a better deal when your currency is worth more?.

      BTW, it should be noted people from the US also go to other countries and funnily enough one country western people go to is India. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism#India

      In fact more Americans go elsewhere compared to people going to the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism#United_States

      A McKinsey and Co. report from 2008 found that a plurality of an estimated 60,000 to 85,000 medical tourists were traveling to the United States for the purpose of receiving in-patient medical care;[77] the same McKinsey study estimated that 750,000 American medical tourists traveled from the United States to other countries in 2007 (up from 500,000 in 2006).

      If you read that link too you'll see some US doctors are making their prices comprable to other countries which again makes it more attractive.

      As with anything it's not as straight forward as Fox News makes it in their attacks on socialised medicine.

    199. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      >He also has access to an amazing amount of healthcare.

      True. But after 50 years with that disease I think the luck-factor is even more amazing.

      That and tenacity

      When my dad faced the choice of constantly being dependent on dialysis or death, he simply got his affairs in order. It takes a lot of strength to go on like that and I marvel that he actually has it. I certainly would not. But I consider myself a lesser man of humbler capacities.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    200. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you meant to spell it "condemning themselves". I am always surprised that the most virulent opponents of US health care reform (besides doctors) are those least able to afford the current health care system, including those who say "I don't have insurance now, why should I be required to have it?"

    201. Re:Best care money can buy helps by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 1

      UHC isn't the right thing. It's the nice thing. There is a difference.

      --
      Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
    202. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Kittenman · · Score: 1

      But even a not-great one routinely outperforms the US system. There are horror stories to be found in both, but they're a lot easier to find in the US.

      Citation needed. Sorry, but us folk outside the US are well aware of the legal system in the States - and (in the same breath - bear with me) the Jerry Springer show. The former means that people tend to publicize and sue to get the $$$ available from malpractice suites. The latter is an example of a media item that allows nation-wide publicity.

      Consider also China, or India. Would you expect their healthcare system to be better or worse than the US? What data is there to support that view?

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    203. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 1

      hardcore bible-thumping shotgun-collecting cousin-fucker

      There were a lot of "hardcore bible-thumping shotgun-collecting cousin-fucker" types involved in the American revolution. Your prejudice fails you.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    204. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 1

      That's funny, because the claims of our current regime that "someone has to step down so someone else can have power", "spread the wealth around so everyone can have a chance", and "government has to create jobs" are all proof that they believe our resources are exhausted.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    205. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Kittenman · · Score: 1

      True - I'm sure if we look hard enough, we could also find someone who would not be dead if not for the NHS.

      Me. I was a sickly kid, NHS (care, Great Ormand street hospital. etc) kept me around.

      So that's two of us. I'm no Stephen Hawking though (though conversely, he's no Kittenman..)

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    206. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 2

      I wish I had mod points to mod you up, because that's a very succinct way of putting it.

      I've lived both inside and outside of the US, and in my experience nearly every medical story that takes places in the US is a horror story that ends in pain, bankruptcy, disability, or death, while most stories coming from elsewhere are merely horror stories about inconvenience, delays, or the occasional mistake.

      As though people don't die outside the US. Talk about confirmation bias at work.

      Approximately 1.25 years ago, my wife was diagnosed with an extremely rare and aggressive cancer. It was at stage IV, having spread to 5 of her internal organs, including her brain. When she was admitted at the hospital, she was too unstable to transport anywhere. Indeed, her chances for surviving into the following week were bleak.

      Any "inconvenience, delays, or the occasional mistake" would have certainly been the end of her. Who knows? Maybe in some other country, they would have decided that she wasn't worth saving. All I know is that the hospital moved mountains to get her the diagnostic imaging needed to get her patched up enough to start chemo without bleeding to death or on her brain. She has seen the best doctors that treat her cancer (she saw the doctor who treated Lance Armstrong, and three of the world's top specialists who treat this disease), and it has all been covered by insurance.

      I wish I could say that she is out of the woods now, but she is not. There is still some active cancer. But her chances of making it this long were <25% at diagnosis, so we are thankful for the last year or so. And for all of the horror stories that you hear about insurance, bankruptcies, etc., our insurance carrier has not given us any troubles. In fact, they follow up with us so often to ensure that she is getting everything that she needs and taking her meds, etc., that it has become a source of mild aggravation. But I'm sure it's helpful for patients who are in worse shape than she is.

      So there. Now you have a story in the US of someone with a serious medical condition who is getting exceptional care.

      Here is another example. Thanks to Facebook, I learned that a Canadian friend of mine injured her toe, and she suspected that she broke it, based on the swelling. Her Canadian friends were chiming in with how she might treat it when I commented, asking why she did not seek medical attention for, oh, I dunno, the fact that she thinks she fractured a bone! She said that they don't treat broken pinky toes, and if she tried to see a doctor, that would mean taking a day off of work to wait 8-10 hours in the emergency room for them to tell her what she already knew, that there was nothing that they could do for her.

      As luck would have it, approximately 1 month later, I stubbed my pinky toe. But this was no ordinary stub. This hurt something fierce. I iced it and tried not to worry too much about it since it wasn't swelling up, and I've always thought that if there's no swelling, that it's unlikely to be broken. Yet the pain continued. So after a few days, I called my doc. He said to come in whenever it was convenient for me and he'd have a quick look at it, so I did. He saw me right away, did some basic physical testing of it ("does this hurt? How about this?") and he confirmed that it was probably not broken, but if it still hurts after two weeks to go get it x-rayed and he'd see to it that it got fixed.

      Well, the pain subsided enough after 2 weeks that I didn't bother getting it x-rayed, but you tell me whose medical system was more user-friendly? The US? Or the Canadian? Nobody made me wait 8 hours, just to tell me to go piss off. Nobody made me take a day off of work. And anyway, my doctor led me to believe that had my toe been broken, that there *was* something that could be done. Maybe Canada just doesn't want to pay for broken toes, which is their prerogative, but when I'm broken, I expect my doctor to a) not treat me like hell, and b) at least try to fix me.

      So great that Canada has "free" health care, but I guess the old adage of getting what you pay for still holds.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    207. Re:Best care money can buy helps by eldepeche · · Score: 1

      I'm skeptical of the claims made in the linked article because it's on the website for a professional organization of orthopedic surgeons, a specialty with some of the highest malpractice insurance premiums, and also because the file name of the linked page includes the word "advocacy."

      Most estimates of the cost of malpractice tort awards are around 2% of health care spending, which definitely isn't nothing. Levels haven't changed much, however, and insurance premiums overall (as opposed to cherry-picking certain specialties) haven't increased as fast as overall spending, which suggests that malpractice/defensive medicine isn't a big part of the cost growth problem, and reducing costs related with malpractice and defensive medicine will serve more to lower doctors' insurance premiums rather than lowering costs.

      This link is to the Red Herrings part of a series examining the causes of high cost and cost growth in American health care. I highly recommend the whole series, but at least check out the Malpractice section of this page:
      http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/what-makes-the-us-health-care-system-so-expensive-red-herrings/

      There is a fraud problem in American health care, but it is providers defrauding public programs (Medicare and Medicaid) rather than people defrauding hospitals, as you said. I haven't seen a compelling solution to this, but I think that more thorough auditing (brought about by more complicated reimbursement policies enacted in the PPACA) could help.

    208. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much of the problem in the US is the crippling level of regulation, however. People fail to realize that every new item that must be complied with has a dollar cost associated with it. Each time you add more on top, the cost goes up. Who pays for it? The customer. Whether rich or poor is immaterial when addressing this simple fact.

      People frequently fail to understand: most regulation is driven by big businesses who can afford to comply with it. It's simply another tool to crush the small business and the poor who might otherwise stand a chance of being competitive.

      Less regulation=cheaper everything, and more opportunities for the poor to get ahead of the curve.

    209. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 0

      You can call it a straw man just like you can claim I'm a jellyfish. But I'm not, and my comment wasn't.

      My point is that being against state-run health care does not mean you want people to die in the street, like former representatives of Florida claim. There exist many, many charities that provide medical services and support for little or no cost. I contribute to these, even though much of my income is already confiscated without my approval by the government, and wasted in a horribly inefficient Medicare/Medicaid system.

      If you don't want to have the state pay for the the health of those who cannot afford it themselves, then you've chosen not to care for them.

      False dilemma.

      Next time, present a logical rebuttal.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    210. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Tuan121 · · Score: 1

      I'm an American that has lived in the UK for 4 years. So I have a little dispute about just claiming all these public healthcare systems "just work".

      Sure not having to (directly) pay for health insurance is nice. However I have seen some of the huge downsides of nationalized insurance. My wife fractured her knee cap a while back. It took them 2 weeks to review the x-rays and actually tell her it was fractured, meanwhile telling her to just be careful when she walks, thus probably making things worse. It then took more than 8 weeks to get her first physiotherapy appointment. 8 *weeks* just to start. Then she finally went and it was basically garbage, they could have sent an email to her with some instructions for how much they helped her. Anyway, they only had her do a few physio session, then stop. Her knee didn't improve, and when she needed more physio she had to wait another 8-10 weeks just to start up again. Needless to say this has really hampered her recovery not being able to start proper therapy right away.

      The moral of the story is not about some bad advice or crappy physio, that can happen anywhere. The major problem is the time delays. I have seen it with my wife and other things with friends, and definitely read about it many times here (with much more serious conditions than we experienced).

      On the plus side, we had a baby here and no complaints. That was wonderful.

      But all in all I've seen how ridiculous wait times with national insurance can really affect an injury, and that is enough for me to say that you can't just say "it works" here without some major qualifications.

    211. Re:Best care money can buy helps by John+Napkintosh · · Score: 1

      Internet from beyond the grave. I'm a little more hopeful than I was this morning.

      --

      Long signatures suck.
    212. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sjames · · Score: 1

      I agree that there's a difference. It is the RIGHT thing. It's saboteurs in Washington aren't just not nice, they're doing wrong.

      Interestingly, at one time nice meant correct.

    213. Re:Best care money can buy helps by izomiac · · Score: 1

      It sounds like she didn't have an abruption after all. While I'm not privy to the details of your daughter's situation, patients often ask for tests and procedures that are not necessary. Pregnant women wanting additional ultrasounds is the classic example. Often this is late enough in the pregnancy to determine the sex of the child, which is something parents want to know despite it being medically unnecessary.

      A good doctor will refuse to perform and bill the government/insurance company for such a procedure (you may pay out of pocket for it if it's not something harmful). A rich doctor will invent a reason and do it anyway. A bad doctor remembers the one time an unnecessary test did show something unexpected, so they rely on their anecdotal experience and waste limited healthcare dollars.

      All that said, a technically skilled doctor may have poor communication skills and not explain this to patients properly (what I expect happened here). OTOH, it's sometimes cheaper to do a test than for the doctor to spend the time explaining why it's unnecessary (or to quell fears). For abruption, 80% of women have bleeding, 70% have pain, and 60% have fetal distress. If these symptoms are absent, and the history isn't particularly worrisome (e.g. automobile accident, cocaine use, prior abruptions, accident just happened) then a high resolution ultrasound to look for a tiny abruption doesn't make economic or medical sense. (Also, the treatment is to manage blood loss and to perform an emergency delivery, so detection before symptoms isn't that helpful. You can't exactly superglue the placenta back to the uterus.)

    214. Re:Best care money can buy helps by euroq · · Score: 1

      Yes, there really is a shortage of people who have the ability to become doctors.

      You have no idea what people go through at med school. I do, my sister and her husband are doctors. They spend 13 years in primary education (elementary middle and high schools), 4 years in higher education (college), 4 years in med school, and 3-4 years training in the field (internships). During med school they have to study ungodly hours and during their internships they have to work ungodly hours (literally 80-100 hours a week... they work and sleep for years, some days unable to even go home to sleep, with only 10 days off a year).

      It doesn't take a crooked type a person to go through this, it takes a very special and amazing type of person to go through this. And why would we want to "crank out" doctors? To have second rate care? You probably don't understand how much knowledge and comprehension a doctor has to have. Very few human beings can do it well. Maybe you're thinking of nurses and other health care professionals... as it turns out, we ARE cranking them out.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    215. Re:Best care money can buy helps by operagost · · Score: 1

      Obviously there are not enough Ron Pauls out there to solve it through their own selflessness.

      No, they're not, and there never will be-- even if you try to force them to help by using the State to confiscate their wealth. They will continue to cheat on their taxes-- using the excuse of this confiscation of wealth being an abuse of an overreaching state-- in much the same way that wealthy southerners defended slavery as an assertion of states' rights. People will continue to cheat the system at a high rate, as they already do now with Medicare and Medicaid. They will rationalize that they are merely getting back what the State took from them.

      Of course, roman_mir gave a much better rebuttal.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    216. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a very good programme on the BBC a few months ago, Ian Hislop: When Bankers Were Good. The programme included this snippet: Philanthropy was the second greatest expenditure in the average Victorian household, coming only second to food, and more money was said to have come from charities than from the government, yet the poor were still in tremendous poverty.

      It was only when it became obvious no amount of charity would be able to truly help the poor, that there was far more government intervention.

    217. Re:Best care money can buy helps by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      I was wondering if anyone would catch that. Yup, that's pretty much what I meant.

      When people criticize the US for not giving heathcare to the poor, it's misdirected criticism. It's the folks between rich and poor (and between young and old) that are left out. Different problem. Can't very well fix things if we focus on the wrong things.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    218. Re:Best care money can buy helps by zildgulf · · Score: 1

      And my fellow Americans are wondering why I am positioning myself to work outside of the US in the not-so-near future. The medications I take have increased in cost year after year in this country. At this rate I will not be able to afford the insurance premiums, deductibles and co-pays in about 10 years or so.

      The American healthcare "system" will go on until total collapse and we will starting having widespread TB, Whooping Cough, Measles, and Hepatitis epidemics. Then life expectancy will decrease rapidly as preventable and curable medical problems, as least deemed so by other developed countries, will remain untreated by a majority of the population for want of money to pay for it.

    219. Re:Best care money can buy helps by kyrio · · Score: 1

      I knew a girl who got herself impregnated by some alcoholic from the USA. She was feeling ill and went to a clinic - this was while she was still in Canada. She waiting 4-5 hours to get checked out because it was obvious to the staff that she wasn't dying or aborting (from the form she filled out and how she looked). Her boyfriend, who has no insurance, whined about the wait - he didn't seem to mind not paying a few hundred for the visit, though. He didn't mind not paying thousands of dollars for the monthly checkups that a pregnant woman should have. He didn't seem to mind signing her up to a special program that covered the hospital bill after he brought her back to the States so she could have her baby. I'm pretty sure that was a USA government program, not just some charity group.

      Considering that her boyfriend has no insurance, where do you think he'll be going to get medical assistance - if he ever actually visits a doctor, that is? A shitty walk in clinic closest to wherever he lives. He will get the same wait, if not a longer wait due to the much higher population density, and he's also going to pay about a week's paycheck for the checkup and other processes (blood tests, etc) - not that he actually had a job.

      On the other hand, unlike her or her boyfriend, I called up doctors in my area and chose the best one for me. My wife, who only recently became a Canadian, did the same thing that I had done over a decade ago. It took her all of 20 minutes to find an amazing doctor to take care of her medical needs. Our doctors set us up with the best specialists they know, when we need them, and they get us appointments within days or, at worst, a few weeks. Our appointments are available for the next day, if we need them, and there are no delays when we get there. If I need some medication for a one time thing, my doctor has no problem giving me as many of her samples as are needed - this way I don't have to pay a fortune for some random meds. Blood tests and x-rays? No problem. I get a little form and take it down to the lab.

      I also have an optometrist who actually loves his job and uses the best technology to do his work. I've never had to wait more than a few minutes to get into my eye exams. I set up an appointment and I've got one within the week.

      Now, the point I'm trying to make is that if I had to try to cover all of my medical expenses, I'd be bankrupt. I don't have to wait for hours for my appointments. I don't have to deal with any bullshit insurance. I've never seen a bill from anything medical related. I go in, I do what I need to do, I leave - no worries, ever.

      If it wasn't for the Canadian health care system, my wife, who has at least nine different medical conditions, would be dead right now. Sure, her family doctor in the USA was a good doctor, and he would help her as much as he could, but that's it. He could only do as much as he could get away with, which isn't much. There was no way she could possibly have afforded health insurance, or any other health care expenses. There is no way I could afford health insurance and the bullshit that comes with it.

      There is no way I could visit the doctor whenever I need to, especially for regular yearly checkups, without Canada's useful health care system. There's no way my wife would be alive without her monthly visits to an assorted selection of doctors.

    220. Re:Best care money can buy helps by kyrio · · Score: 1

      The consequences to him doing otherwise would be a gun in his face and confinement in a cell.

    221. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Unless there's some obscure eligibility criteria I'm not aware of (entirely possible), I think you meant Medicaid, not Medicare. The age requirements for Medicare put it well outside the typical age-range for childbearing.

    222. Re:Best care money can buy helps by zildgulf · · Score: 1

      Or raise taxes for Medicare progressively but give a tax credit to those that buy health insurance. Since it is a "across-the-board" tax is would be 100% Constitutional it would have the same effect as mandated health insurance which seems to be Constitutional debatable by some people.

      Also limit underwriting standards on health insurance. I would favor a statewide underwriting standard, instead of by individual or groups, to prevent sick people from being priced out of health insurance. The focus of health insurers should be to increase the health of the covered so less medical care would be needed, not have them cherry pick the healthiest to join.

      Also the working class should be allowed to be in Medicare if they have no coverage and elect to do so since they are pay some of the cost via the increase in taxes . If anyone refuses all insurance options, including the "free" (no premium) Medicare plan, then they should have to require at least a 1/3 down payment on all elective procedures.

      We have to get almost everyone in an healthplan of some type to defray the rising cost of medical care.

      Also increase the number of medical student conditional loans from the government. They pay for schooling but they can lower or forgive the debt if they serve in under-served areas of the country. If the doctor is earning less then the payments back should be less. If he has the debt after 20 years forgive the debt regardless of earning power. This is done with many federal college loans.

    223. Re:Best care money can buy helps by zildgulf · · Score: 1

      Also I might add that if we choose not to pay for the care of the sick then we invite epidemics. TB will rise again and this time will afflict the everyone regardless of economic class if we do not pay for the care of the sick.

    224. Re:Best care money can buy helps by euroq · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying the world is ready for eugenics just yet, but maybe we could apply some social engineering to slightly decrease the life expectancy of the terminally stupid.

      Um, isn't that eugenics?

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    225. Re:Best care money can buy helps by tragedy · · Score: 1

      People from all countries all over the world with all kinds of health care systems keep coming to all kinds of other countries for surgery. People go from Germany to the US for surgery, from the US to Germany for surgery, and from Russia to Mexico or Mexico to Russia, etc., etc., etc. Sometimes it's for financial reasons, sometimes it's to get a procedure that's banned in their home country, or for which there's a waiting list or scheduling issue for a qualified doctor, and sometimes it's because there simply isn't anyone in their own country either able or willing to provide the procedure, or at least who they trust to perform it. I think you fail to understand is that specialized medical fields tend to be a pretty small world. In some, pretty much all the practitioners in the world know each other.

      So, if you can provide something other than a few anecdotal examples for your insinuation, then we'll listen. Perhaps some real, meaningful, statistics. Otherwise, your question, rhetorical or not, has been answered.

    226. Re:Best care money can buy helps by zildgulf · · Score: 1

      No, what is sad is that we are not facing our problem with healthcare.

      We as a society must determine if we should take care of sick people or leave them to suffer and some will likely die prematurely. If we do treat the sick how we must determine how to pay for it. That is not a "luxury", that is reality. If we don't find a way to pay for the care then we can't treat the sick. If we determine that we will not treat the sick then we must say so now. There is no middle ground here and the math does not lie. If some service costs money then someone MUST pay for it. There is no free lunch.

      I suggest we fire every politician that says otherwise. That would be a good start.

    227. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Note: this isn't a defense of the US medical system. It's simply to point out that direct comparison is not usually workable.

      The US has more than twice the landmass of the EU and a population density of less than 1/4 of the EU. That leads to some very significant differences in how coverage for anything works in the US versus any single EU country (or even all of them combined).

      What insurance you have does not affect wait times. Wait times are determined by the amount of demand versus that amount of resources. That tends to be higher, on average, in countries with public medical systems, but is by no means the case across the board. The wait times you experience are unusual on average for the US, but likely not in the particular area you lived. Where I live, the only wait times are for seeing primary care physicians, because there is a growing shortage of them nationwide. I can see any specialist I need to within a week's time if it's necessary. If it's urgent, there are few that I couldn't see within a couple days. For most, if it's urgent I can find one available within the next 12 hours. You have your anecdotes; I have mine.

      Your mileage will vary though, because it's an enormous country with many incredibly diverse regional economies. It's sort of like the EU, except with twice as many countries and twice the area.

    228. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      In many other countries, people don't have good reason to be scared of their government. In the US, the bi-party system is something to be scared of. It's not even really a bi-party system. All the politicians pull the same crap. The only difference is the rhetoric they spout in order to get elected.

      You require a supermajority to break things. In the US, it requires a supermajority to fix things.

    229. Re:Best care money can buy helps by tragedy · · Score: 1

      It looks like it's about 38% of GDP vs about 28% of GDP in the US. Meanwhile, US healthcare costs are about 17% of GDP.

    230. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      You've been in a desperate situation before so you know that you'll want anything ANYTHING done. That's why I don't trust horror stories or anecdotes when it comes to healthcare. You are not in your best state of mind when you are desperate and anything that's being done will never be enough. It's quite easy to be unreasonable. A layman isn't trained to understand what's a reasonable expectation. And a layman in a desperate situation is not at his best.
      When my girlfriend was in hospital with cervical cancer AND she had a huge portion of her guts cut out AND chemo therapy did more harm than good AND they kept finding it had spread further than they had thought AND I was told there was nothing to be done I was far from feeling reasonable.

      Nothing to be done. That's hard to accept.

      A broken pinky toe is not easy to fix. I never thought of going to a doctor when I had broken mine as I couldn't think of a good way to fix the mechanical problem myself. Tried gauze and tooth picks(they turned out to be not sturdy enough so I used a lot...and found out they are quite pointy). I didn't die from it and my shoes still fit. So...perhaps they are right not do do anything?

      Back in university I took some medicine lectures to supplement my CS main courses. We had this lecturer who was a major proponent for Evidence Based Medicine. He said back then that based on statistics the younger a woman is the less usefull a mammography is. The younger the women are the worse their prognosis is to survive cancer. He argued that mass screening as proposed in the 80ies and 90ies would actually save only a tiny, tiny percentage of young women so'd be not worth the cost. I don't quite remember the details and the statistics and this was the most in your face example he gave. Back then I'd have agreed with him(although gnashing my teeth).
      Now I'd gladly punch him in his face.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    231. Re:Best care money can buy helps by tragedy · · Score: 1

      They're forced by law to stabilize them, not to perform any and all forms of treatment they require. It basically means that if they have more than a few hours to live, they can be shown the door. That doesn't stop the occasional person from dying in the waiting room after being denied treatment of course.

    232. Re:Best care money can buy helps by The_dev0 · · Score: 1

      As though people don't die outside the US. Talk about confirmation bias at work.

      Who knows? Maybe in some other country, they would have decided that she wasn't worth saving.

      Youre hypocrisy is showing. How much did that care cost? If this argument is going to be fought with one anecote after another, I could tell an almost identical story about my mother here in Australia - however she received top-notch care for 6 years before the cancer was completely removed, all for a total cost of nothing. And that includes her medications and hospital stays. I recently spent a few months working in the US and heard stories like yours - but they were far outweighed by the multitude who receive less-than-ideal care, and pay so much it bankrupts them. I suffered a small injury while working there, and my boss thought it might be prudent to go to the hospital. After being told how much it was going to cost simply for an x-ray and 10 minutes with a doctor I balked and waited a week until I got home. The price the US hospital was going to charge me with my traveller's insurance? $2000. Cost at home? You guessed it. Nada. Explain to me how I would have "got what I paid for" with a system that is padded so drastically to fabricate costs and inflate the cost of healthcare so insurance companies continue making money hand over fist?

      --
      Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
    233. Re:Best care money can buy helps by The_dev0 · · Score: 1

      She was pulling your leg. About the only issue to deal with when using NHS is a wait. The reason "Wealthy" Canadians pay the money to be treated in the US, as has been said many times in this discussion, is mostly to either a) avoid any waiting times, or b) some people equate cost with quality - so the more expensive option MUST somehow be better.

      --
      Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
    234. Re:Best care money can buy helps by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      So your solution is to force others at gunpoint to do it?

      Yes. Just like my solution to "needing a police force" is "forcing others at gunpoint to do it".

    235. Re:Best care money can buy helps by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Then why do we allow protest?

      What sort of idiotic statement is this ? We "allow" protest for the same reason we "allow" elections.

    236. Re:Best care money can buy helps by steelfood · · Score: 1

      How about just lying? Or, if you're more Hanlon-inclined, how about being too lazy to fact-check?

      Do you really think that if many of these people actually knew what they were talking about, that they'd be spouting the crap that they do? Usually, they're ignorant, and willfully remain that way, so that they can maintain their stance without appearing morally bankrupt--to themselves.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    237. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Yup. This gets lost in the debate usually. The legal reforms undertaken in the US aren't about providing health care, at least not directly. They are about requiring the purchase of health insurance, which leaves those people in the same boat as those who already purchase health insurance.

      It's easier to get health care if you have nothing than it is to get health care if you have insurance with a scummy company. These reforms do nothing to prevent companies from operating business as usual. Having insurance in the US is no guarantee that the insurer will actually, in practice, cover what they should.

    238. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      I suffered a small injury while working there, and my boss thought it might be prudent to go to the hospital. After being told how much it was going to cost simply for an x-ray and 10 minutes with a doctor I balked and waited a week until I got home. The price the US hospital was going to charge me with my traveller's insurance? $2000. Cost at home? You guessed it. Nada.

      I'm surprised that your boss, assuming that he was American, would have suggested that you go to a hospital. Hospitals are for emergencies. If you could fly all the way back to Australia with whatever happened to you, then it was not an emergency. What you wanted was urgent care.

      Urgent care would have run you about $125 without insurance. With insurance, I pay a $20 copay. Same as my regular doctor.

      By the way, I see that you pay 1.5-2.5% of your income for your health insurance. That is not the same as "free", but it is less that what we pay here, I suppose. My family probably pays about 4% or so, but most of that is because my wife is so sick and blows through all of the deductibles in about 12 minutes.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    239. Re:Best care money can buy helps by oursland · · Score: 1

      Newsflash! With lots of money you can afford better things!

      It sure must be great to be financially superior to everyone else.

    240. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Medicaid's going to pay far more than that for a person with a debilitating condition.

    241. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      She was pulling your leg.

      I have already acknowledged this possibility. As I stated before, she looked serious enough to me, but I didn't stalk her back to the UK and hang out in her waiting room to verify.

      Anyway, does it even matter if it's true? The fact that she would even think to make such a joke indicates a problem. I've never heard an American Vet make jokes about human patients pleading for care from them.

      About the only issue to deal with when using NHS is a wait.

      This is false. You simply haven't yet received an unfavorable ruling from NICE.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    242. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      It also depends on which state the person lives in. Each one is administered separately.

    243. Re:Best care money can buy helps by steelfood · · Score: 1

      You have to start somewhere. It's not pretty, and it's not perfect, but without a beginning, you're never getting there.

      It is naive to even imagine that you'll get it right the first time. An issue as complex as this would need to go through several iterations just to cover all of the exceptions and finge cases, even if most of it works out the first time around.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    244. Re:Best care money can buy helps by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      What's sad is when I see people of all stripes who trot out straw men, assuming that there is no other way of paying for health care other than using the state to take the money from other people.

      It's not an assumption, it's a conclusion based on evidence.

      Countries with publicly-funded healthcare or mandatory private health insurance (with government assistance for the poor) consistently have the best outcomes and the lowest costs.

    245. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Stenchwarrior · · Score: 1

      I would never say it sucks. Actually, Tricare seems to cover stuff that my old ins. company never would have, plus I'm not required to get a referral from a primary care if I want to go straight to a specialist. Your military friends may be talking about how the military immediate care clinic/hospital sucks because it absolutely does. I was on active duty once and needed to see a doc. for a simple cold and I ended up waiting in the post-clinic for 7 hours. 7 HOURS!! That's fucking insane....but I never saw a bill and they cover everything.

      --
      Loading...
    246. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Stenchwarrior · · Score: 1

      I always do that....Medicaid vs. Medicare. Sorry. It was actually called "Passport" which is never why I actually learned the difference.

      --
      Loading...
    247. Re:Best care money can buy helps by tragedy · · Score: 1

      First of all, very sorry about your wife's cancer. It really is terrible to watch a loved one go through that. As your personal experience shows, the US private insurance system is not an absolute failure in all cases. I don't think anyone was saying that. Based on the details you give, however, it doesn't sound like someone in the condition she was in would have had trouble being admitted into the hospital and getting treatment in a country with a socialized medical system either. I can't help speculating that, in some respects in either type of healthcare system, she may have been "lucky" to get a rare (but treatable) form of cancer than a more common form. Although it limits the pool of doctors who are competent to treat it, the type of doctor who knows anything about it is likely to have that knowledge and experience either from being highly specialized or just a very good doctor. I don't think her particular case says anything deep about either socialized medicine or private insurance. I wish her and you the best of luck as she goes through this.

      For the broken toe example, with a severely broken toe, surgery might be required, but otherwise there's not a lot medical science can do. Generally, people will be able to tell themselves if it's that bad. For a typical fracture, there's not really much that can be done. An x-ray can verify if it's broken or not, then the doctor can give you the exact same advice to treat it that they would give if it weren't broken and it was some other toe injury causing pain. If it's bad enough, or more likely they wanted the patient to feel that something were being done, they might put it in a splint, which is something most people really could do themselves. For the most part, though, for that sort of thing, the doctor's advice is going to be to get rest, try to avoid walking on it more than necessary, maybe take a non-prescription medication to treat pain or discomfort, get plenty of fluids and eat well. Pretty much the same general advice they give for everything people come to them with where there's nothing to be done but let the body heal itself. Your Canadian friend's opinion on what the doctor would say and do was spot on, and seems to have been the exact same thing that happened to you with your doctor. Your Canadian friend thought that it would be necessary to wait in an emergency room, but she probably could have just made an appointment with a doctor like you did. For some reason, plenty of people on private insurance as well think that they have to go and wait in the emergency room for everything. What I do find surprising is that your doctor told you to stop by at a time of your choosing rather than setting an appointment. That's frankly amazing. I don't know of any doctor that operates that way, so I'm assuming you have some sort of relationship with this doctor beyond just doctor/patient.

    248. Re:Best care money can buy helps by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1
      So would he fare better in the US? Would a HMO give expensive drugs to an early onset Alzheimers patient? Is assisted suicide covered by insurance in the US?

      But the good news is: Pratchett is is rich, UK or US, he can afford to buy expensive unproven drugs, and he can go to Switzerland to get himself killed, because he can afford to. So at the one example you give of "biggovhealth"'s worst, its only s bad as the American system. Pretty sad you are proud to have found it.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    249. Re:Best care money can buy helps by steelfood · · Score: 1

      It's not luck. It's a special case that progresses very slowly, and does not attack his vitals. They determined this even way back.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    250. Re:Best care money can buy helps by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Cognitive function does not decline with ALS. Most nervous diseases will destroy the mind as well as the body, so that when the body finally dies, the mind really isn't there anymore. Not so with ALS. It's one of the real tragedies of the disease. You're literally watching yourself waste away, unable to do anything about it. You know the progress of your disease, and you can still literally put a number to the time you have remaining.

      The diagnosis itself is incredibly disheartening. There are no known treatments for it--not even give it a fighting chance like cancer. The cause itself is completely unknown, though it's linked to both neurotoxins and head trauma (but specific causes are unknown).

      Hawking is lucky--very lucky--that while his disease has wasted most of his nervous and muscular system away, the most important parts remain intact. And for 50 years, no less, when most people live 1 to 2 years at the very most. Granted, he also got the disease fairly early, but so has many others, and not to the same effect.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    251. Re:Best care money can buy helps by The_dev0 · · Score: 1

      This is false. You simply haven't yet received an unfavorable ruling from NICE.

      Huh? Almost the entirety of "unfavourable" rulings are because either the drug doesn't work or won't be suitable for that particular patients issues. NICE is generally accepted as being cruel to be kind, true, but at least they try to make decision based on patients needs, not whether or not a pharma company wants to pad it's bottom line with more ineffective drugs. http://www.hsj.co.uk/legaJ-briefing-nice-rulings/54290.article

      --
      Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
    252. Re:Best care money can buy helps by The_dev0 · · Score: 1

      I was kind of interested in an absolute dollar figure for your wifes total care, including medico co-payments, insurance rates and out-of-pocket expenses. Percentages are less than useless when neither you nor I know what the other earns or our respective tax threshholds. The injury was a minor fracture in my wrist, and I wass able to deal with the pain as I had only 6 days left on my contract before I flew home. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. Also, there may be some confusion with semantics - where I'm from if you are injured you go to the hospital/GP and THEY will asses what level of care you need. Whats the difference between emergency care, urgent care or other beside price bracket? (BTW, I'm glad your Missus is on the mend)

      --
      Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
    253. Re:Best care money can buy helps by oursland · · Score: 1

      Where do you live? I'm in San Diego and I have to schedule a urologist appointment 5 weeks in advance, with insurance. In the last 3 years I have had surgery to repair detached retinas for a little over $12k and tonsils removed for a little over $7k, both without insurance.

    254. Re:Best care money can buy helps by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      It's clunky, it's bureaucratic and it still shits on what America offers.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    255. Re:Best care money can buy helps by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      It's a standard wingnut talking point. They say "but the richest people can buy anything they want!" as if it answers in any way the point being made, that normal people can't bloody afford the care in question.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    256. Re:Best care money can buy helps by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      What's sad is when I see people of all stripes debating against public healthcare, forgetting that they're condemning future thinkers or leaders or writers just because they (or their families) can't afford their own healthcare.

      That's because to them the only leaders that count think ahead no more than 4Qs. Those thinking ahead to their next election may already be "visionaries" IOW dreamers.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    257. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If she is married to a soldier then her healthcare would be covered by the government-run TriCare system, not a private insurer, and she can get ultrasounds from any military doc as well.

    258. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find that somewhat amusing since it sounds exactly like what my dad went through working for intel, what a number of my friends have gone through working dead end jobs, and any number of other career paths. The only difference being that they have a much more direct link to the life or death of their patient (since automobiles, food service, etc could lead to someone dying even inadvertantly due to your misconduct.), and that they have a hope of a higher salary in the future. Although the real question is: Does the current payment structure for all tiers of health care really coincide with the quality of service we as americans should be giving/recieving given our countries self appointed status as a 'first world nation'?

    259. Re:Best care money can buy helps by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      Where do you live? I'm in San Diego and I have to schedule a urologist appointment 5 weeks in advance, with insurance. In the last 3 years I have had surgery to repair detached retinas for a little over $12k and tonsils removed for a little over $7k, both without insurance.

      Texas. I don't know if that says something about being in a "Red" State. When I was in Michigan, the appointments were about a month out for check ups. I never had to go in for anything major so I don't know about urgent care there.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    260. Re:Best care money can buy helps by syousef · · Score: 1

      The problem is that 25 year olds are not "kids", and anyone in their mid-20s (presumably with a Bachelor's degree) should not be riding on the backs of the public.

      Okay. You first. Please give back every cent ever spent to directly benefit you by any government organisation or program, and promise not to take a cent if you or yours are ever diagnosed with a life threatening illness.

      In some cases it takes the village to raise the child, and in others it takes the village to raise the self-righteous hypocritical idiot.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    261. Re:Best care money can buy helps by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      My best friend from high school had a kid at 19 with no insurance. They made out just fine. I don't know how because I never really asked, but it's not like they had the kid in their bath tub. They went to a doctor and everything.

      The point is that people with no insurance and no disposable income seem to have kids in this country every day. When someone has a kid outside a hospital, it makes the news (or a movie if done in a Walmart). These same people get sick and injured just like everyone with insurance and yet, they all seem to get comparable care.

      So, please, stop acting like no money=no medical care. I honestly don't know if you know it or not, but that's pure BS. Your wife would not be dead without government health care. She may have had to stiff a few doctors, but in the US, it is against the law to flat out turn someone away simply because they have no insurance.

      Oh, and unlike Canada, our non-citizens get care absolutely free.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    262. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      It's not necessarily always "less" regulation that's required. In many cases it's simply smarter regulation.

      However, that would require smarter regulators. I believe they're an extinct species in the US.

    263. Re:Best care money can buy helps by drfreak · · Score: 1

      Just to disclaim myself before I speak, I do work for a medical group and understand the current stupidity which is the selection process dictating who gets care for what depending on how "medically necessary" their condition is.

      That said, the choices of who gets what for Health Maintenance Organizations' members, they normally get their insurance through an employer and pay the minimum out-of-pocket. There are also Point Of Service plans (POS) and Preferred Provider Organizations (PPOs) in the basic American health care scheme of things. You pay more for a PPO or POS product because it gives you more choices about who you are allowed to see (anyone) but also drives your own cost up because they have no control.

      When people complain about health care in America, they are typically complaining about their HMO. The HMO is a delicate balance (like a house of cards) which tries to compensate for the differences in care cost vs. what the member (patient, if you will) and their employer pays in.

      Say what you will about American insurance, but what we try to do every day is minimize the cost of the chronically sick and the hypochondriacs because just like back in school they drive the cost up (or ruin it) for everybody and health care grades on a curve.

      As an Industry, American health care is struggling but still working hard to make sure those up-standing citizens still get good care. I for one am sure qualified to say it isn't perfect though and hope the reform bill and certain directives kicking-in over the next years will help to remedy our current state.

      I see people talking about how Canadian and NHS healthcare takes care of everyone despite what their employer pays for, but they have the same need to control costs. In America, the Hippocratic oath binds all health care providers to treat patients no matter who they are, where they came from, or what they have going on. I haven't researched Canada and NHS myself, but I doubt they offer the same level of care to indigent patients. If they do, maybe they don't pass the cost of care for indigents to the masses as America does. If that is the case, I applaud them but wonder where the money comes from. Maybe that is part of why taxes are so much higher in the U.K.?

    264. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Etcetera · · Score: 1

      Yes it covers her but barely. If the doctor does not take tricare like most of the better ones, you are stuck with the cheapies that dont want to do crap and only spend 5 minutes with you.

      Way the bury the lede there.... If "most of the better" doctors don't take tricare, shouldn't that tell you something about socialized medicine?

    265. Re:Best care money can buy helps by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      "Total tax rate" is as difficult to say in Canada as it is in the US thanks to different tax brackets, levels of government, etc. My personal income tax rate last year came out to a surprisingly low 18% (calculated by taking actual tax, divide by job income) thanks to various deductions. This includes federal and provincial taxes. What was *your* income tax rate?

      (Obviously that excludes property and point-of-sale taxes).

      The supplemental health insurance through my work is about $25 a month ($300/year). Key benefits for me personally: dental and prescriptions covered 100%, i.e. no deductible.

      I can't sort out the mess of conflicting numbers for how much the average American pays for health insurance--some write that even with employers covering part of it, it ranges from $300-$500 a month ($3600-$6000/year). So I'll again ask, how much do *you* personally pay for health insurance through your employer's plan, and any additional, personal plans?

      Then consider that America in 2007 spent almost twice as much taxpayer money on health care, per capita, than Canada ($6096 vs $3173). Americans should be on the streets protesting what a bad return-on-investment they're getting with their health care system... sorry, health *insurance* system.

      Yeah, Canada's health care system has issues. On the whole I'll take ours over the American system though.

    266. Re:Best care money can buy helps by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      A heart surgeon in France makes about 160,000 Euros a year. A heart surgeon in America make $500k a year. Malpractice insurance adds between 10% and 30% to the cost of the doctor, depending on the state and the particular field. It's not all malpractice insurance.

      This shouldn't be surprising, if you realize that the median income in the US is higher than most countries in Europe, you would also naturally expect the median income of doctors to be higher as well.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    267. Re:Best care money can buy helps by quenda · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile in Canada:

      But what is your total tax rate?

      When you add in government budget deficit and extra health care cost, the US and Canada are very similar, about 38%.

      See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canadian_and_American_economies

    268. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      They will pay up to an additional $11,000 in living expenses if you live in a certified hospice (nursing home). Finding a home that charges less than $15,000 per year is all but impossible. Most of them take all that is given to you and provide an "all bills paid with restrictions to internally provided medical care" type living environment. They don't pay for trips to the hospital. Also. You have to be completely debilitated, in the last stages of the decease.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    269. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      You can't qualify for Medicare until you are completely disabled, eg a paraplegic. She would have to be in the last stages of the decease. I'm sorry to hear that.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    270. Re:Best care money can buy helps by quenda · · Score: 1

      our local hospital gave a 'go home a die' diagnosis. Cleveland said they could do something. I'd like all hospitals to have better treatment .

      More is not always better. (Where I am, at least) the problem is more one of excessive intervention at end of life than not enough. When doctors are dying, they have less treatment than average people. Excessive treatment may mean a slow painful (or doped out) death in hospital, rather than a slightly quicker more dignified death at home. Or it can mean risking death on the operating table for very limited gains. And that is without considering the financial cost.

    271. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Medicaid's mandatory benefits under Federal law don't have a cost cap. Inpatient hospital care is the very first item listed under mandatory services provided, with outpatient hospital care being #2.

      Something must be really screwed up in Texas (assumption based on your sig) if that's what they're advertising there. Either they're not complying with Federal law or they're misrepresenting their obligations.

    272. Re:Best care money can buy helps by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      I was listening to a CBC radio broadcast about inverted totalitarism. That is where the corporations control the economy, rather than a single dictator. The interviewee actually had excellent points about corporations controling what Americans read, see and hear. Corporations put profit infront of greed. For example, this American interviewee indicated that 45,000 Americans die each year because they cannot get affordable medical treatment. Children with cronic illnesses can't get assurance, and bankrupt Americans.

      The problems are that the people do not control congress or the senate. It is the corporations, the newsmedia, because Americans are swayed by the 6 media organizations that are owned. The only true news to come out in the short past was wekileaks. Anyway, it was very discouraging to listen to an interview where the reminder of the social status of Americans is so sad. The unpublished unemployment is about 20 percent and far far too many people holding temporary jobs at Walmarts or equivalent stores.

      I am the messenger, I love our Canadian healthcare system, and wish the Conservatives in Canada, who follow USA corps rules try to dissolve it, that they themselves be a dissolved party.

         

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    273. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sconeu · · Score: 1

      I find that rather hard to believe, and her Medicare card is my evidence.

      What's your evidence?

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    274. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Follow up -- from the horse's mouth

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    275. Re:Best care money can buy helps by willaien · · Score: 1

      And yet, the blue collar worker who works two part time jobs to make ends meet, because neither boss will let him work full-time (too scared of having to shell out for insurance) won't get the care you're receiving. They'll die, leaving major, expensive medical bills in their wake that will bankrupt their spouse.

    276. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Urkki · · Score: 1

      False choice.

      It's not only a choice between: do what your gov't forces you under the gun point or GTFO.

      There is another choice - fuck the government and the horse it rode in on. It's up to the individuals to make individual choices and to help those they want to help without being forced by the guns of gov't officials.

      Ron Paul 2012.

      But the thing is, it's usually not just "fuck the government", it's also "fuck everybody else". And yes, people do that. "Fuck everybody else". That's what crime is be all about, for instance... And just because you haven't been caught yet doesn't mean it's not metaphorically "at gunpoint", once you've crossed the line into crime (and interestingly, many criminals don't think they're really criminals).

      So I think I'll stay with my assesment: play by the rules, ultimately "at gunpoint" (which includes becoming a criminal to avoid that), or GTFO, to a society which is more to your liking. The third choice is open revolution, since political movement is "playing by the rules". And no, something like tax evasion is not starting a revolution, it falls in the "fuck everybody" category.

      I'm not saying it's black&white, and I'm certainly not saying government represents "will of the people" all that well, but in cases like society deciding to "socialistically" take care of the sick via public health care, it is pretty black&white. Other things, like many forms of social security, I can see as more gray area, but even then same applies "play by the rules, or GTFO... or start a revolution."

    277. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      Based on the details you give, however, it doesn't sound like someone in the condition she was in would have had trouble being admitted into the hospital and getting treatment in a country with a socialized medical system either.

      I didn't really intend for my personal anecdote to serve as an indictment of socialized medicine, but I can see where it came across that way. The idea was to provide a story for the GP of the US system functioning well.

      I guess my point with bringing up the Canada story is that if you look closely, every system has its warts. I'm sure you're right that for a minor broken toe, the best course of action is to allow it to heal on its own. If that's the answer, I'm willing to accept that. What I'm not willing to accept is waiting 8-10 hours in some god-forsaken ER to have a doctor tell me that if they tried to treat it, the recovery from that would be worse than just letting the toe heal (or whatever the reason is that a broken toe doesn't need a splint or any other help like a finger might).

      The other difference is that he made me feel like he actually cared about the fact that my toe hurt. I know it sounds silly, but this is important. Clearly, he knew that I'd feel better after a few weeks of going easy on it, and that's fine. But the way that he treated me was different. He didn't make we wait to discourage me from seeking treatment. He didn't just tell me to go pound sand ("We don't treat these. Go away.") He told me that I'd feel better in a few weeks, but if not, to go in and get an X-Ray and we'd take it from there. That's a plan of action. You're right that there is no practical medical difference between what the treatment would have been had I been Canadian. It's more that my doc gave (or pretended convincingly to give) a hoot about me.

      What I do find surprising is that your doctor told you to stop by at a time of your choosing rather than setting an appointment. That's frankly amazing. I don't know of any doctor that operates that way, so I'm assuming you have some sort of relationship with this doctor beyond just doctor/patient.

      As it turns out, I do not have any type of special relationship with my doctor, other than I think that he's great. The reason that he was able to see me on a drop-in basis is that he does not fill all available appointment slots--that way, he can accommodate those whose schedules really require appointments and those whose schedules are too erratic for appointments. You just call ahead to see if he is busy. This is not just for "sick" visits, either. He handles annual physicals this way, too.

      This is not unique to this particular doctor, either. Slowly but surely, some US medical practices are moving in this direction. Some don't schedule appointments at all. I will come right out and say that this was one of the main selection criteria I had when choosing an internist. I hate, absolutely positively hate, being made to sit in a waiting room. I recognize that it antagonizes me beyond all reasonable proportion, but at least I recognize it and chose a doctor who fit with my little personality defect.

      Anyway, hopefully that explains my position that US medicine doesn't completely stink, or at least stink much more than any other country's system.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    278. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth, after hearing enough stories of sick people, I am completely uncomfortable with the idea of an unaccountable board of "medical experts" deciding who gets what without even examining the patient. This assumes a level of understanding of the human body that science simply does not posses. If it was simply a matter of Evil Drug Companies vs. Common Sense, then that would be another matter entirely. (I'm sure that the article that you linked to was great, but I'm not going to pay in order to read it.)

      Perhaps these panels are great and all, but when they come up with guidelines based on X number of weeks, what happens if you kid is born just a few days too early? This. Note, I realize that a kid born at 22 weeks is probably not going to survive, but it should be the individual medical staff evaluating the individual kid who determines viability. Not some panel in London.

      Had my wife shown up to a UK hospital with such a low chance of survival, would they have gone to heroic measures to attempt to save her? Or would they have made her comfortable?

      If you don't want an unfavorable ruling from NICE, don't get old.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    279. Re:Best care money can buy helps by oursland · · Score: 1

      My surgeries were in South Dakota. I don't think "red state" has anything to do with anything.

    280. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      I was kind of interested in an absolute dollar figure for your wifes total care, including medico co-payments, insurance rates and out-of-pocket expenses. Percentages are less than useless when neither you nor I know what the other earns or our respective tax threshholds.

      I don't have a good answer for you. I do the business finances, and my wife does the personal. I could ask her, but I'm not going to burden her with this for you. :P Hopefully you understand.

      Here's a rough estimate of her cancer cost:
      3 years of hitting out of pocket max on deductibles/coinsurance (she was unlucky enough to get sick at the end of 2010, so we managed to hit 3 calendar years despite being sick for only 1.25 years): $7500
      1.25 years of specialist visits. I'm going to make a rough estimate here at 2 out of every 3 weeks @$40 each: $1733. Let's round up to $2000 since I could be forgetting something
      She received most of her drugs in the hospital, so those cost us nothing out of pocket. She received about 10 months of neupogen and maybe 4 rounds of emend (nausea control. works wonders!), which are specialty drugs at $50 each, so chuck in $700. The rest were generics at $5-20 each. Let's just round to $1000 to include those.

      So that gets us to about $10,500 in out of pocket medical costs. We did some travel to out of town docs that was probably not strictly necessary, but we felt it would be valuable. Bump it to $15,000. This overstates the travel cost, but anyway, I probably missed some medical costs in there, so it probably evens out in the wash.

      Also, there may be some confusion with semantics - where I'm from if you are injured you go to the hospital/GP and THEY will asses what level of care you need. Whats the difference between emergency care, urgent care or other beside price bracket? (BTW, I'm glad your Missus is on the mend)

      It's a little late now, and hopefully you won't need this again, but just in case, here in the US, you basically have the following:

      Emergency Room: This is for acute problems (need immediate care) or serious problems (going to be admitted to the hospital). Think car accident, difficulty breathing, uncontrolled bleeding, etc. With insurance, they will ding you for $300+ if you show up at the ER and aren't admitted, unless you can show that you had no other choice. You might be treated with a certain amount of contempt if you clog up the ER with a non-emergent condition, and you will certainly be triaged behind everyone who comes in with something acute, so you will wait a long, long time if you show up with a sniffle or a sprain or something.

      Urgent Care: Non-acute problems that require a doctor that happen when your primary doc is closed or when you don't have a primary doc in the area. Cost: depends on insurance. Mine is billed as a regular office visit at $20. Some bill as a specialist visit: $40-50. Without insurance, expect to pay about $125.

      Primary Doctor: This is who basically sees you for annual physicals and non-completely-minor ailments. (or minor ailments, if there are no convenient care clinics in your area). Cost $20+meds with insurance. Without, expect to pay about $125.

      Convenient Care Clinics: For minor, routine issues. Strep throat, ear infections, etc. Located in drug stores and staffed by Nurse Practitioners, not doctors. So it's really more for if you already suspect what's wrong and just need someone to handle it cheaply and efficiently. For instance, when my kids were little, we'd take them there for ear infections. We'd be in and out the door in under 20 minutes with medicine in-hand, if antibiotics were required. Cost, including meds: $25.

      Regarding my wife, I appreciate the sentiment. I wish I could report that she is on the mend, but the truth is we just don't know yet. Her cancer is almost gone, which is good, but the last little bit isn't responding to chemo, which is bad since it's aggressive. There are essentially 3 more options to try fo

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    281. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      And yet, the blue collar worker who works two part time jobs to make ends meet, because neither boss will let him work full-time (too scared of having to shell out for insurance) won't get the care you're receiving. They'll die, leaving major, expensive medical bills in their wake that will bankrupt their spouse.

      It is true that having access to more resources will provide better medical care, but only to a point. To use a car analogy, consider a rich person's car vs. a poor person's car. The rich person's car may have more safety features and may be more comfortable and may be more reliable (or not. Some luxury cars have notoriously poor repair records), but in the end, both cars transport the occupants from point A to point B.

      It may sound callous, but as long as everyone has access to a certain, acceptable level of medical care, what difference does it make if a rich person can buy more of it? I think that there is a basic misconception that health insurance = medical care. My wife receives treatment right alongside people who aren't able to pay for it. It's not like blue collar workers are getting kicked to the curb right and left.

      Also, dirty little secret here: more medical care is not always better care. Oftentimes, it's worse. Every procedure has risks and side effects. Many provide longevity at the expense of quality of life.

      Lastly, bankruptcy sounds a lot worse than it really is. Personal bankruptcy is more of a reset button so people don't remain in debt for life. Many of my tenants have previous bankruptcy filings, and they just go on living their lives, I promise.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    282. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parents'

    283. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if there are problems with a good system we should not bother implementing the system?

      The NHS, and indeed all the UK's social programmes, have all the problems you've listed. We still consider them worth having.

    284. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > decrease the life expectancy of the terminally stupid
      Self-fulfilling prophecy.

    285. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you believe that the people of the world have been duped by Michael Moore.... well, you may be a "beneficiary" of the mental health care available to the poor in the US.

    286. Re:Best care money can buy helps by somersault · · Score: 1

      You talk as if no other nation in the world has biochemists and pharmaceutical companies...

      --
      which is totally what she said
    287. Re:Best care money can buy helps by witherstaff · · Score: 1

      I can understand the choice, having seen hospice help with grandparents they are very helpful. In this case the option was perhaps 3 months of such high pain management to be mostly out of it, laying in bed waiting to pass, compared to a few years of being able to actually do something with life. It was a rough decision but it seemed like the right choice. One thing that I noticed, doctors being asked 'if this was your mother, what would you do' seems to bring things to a human level.

    288. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      If you read that link too you'll see some US doctors are making their prices comprable to other countries which again makes it more attractive.

      Question is why? I can't speak about the rest of the country, only NY City, because that's where I lived and practiced Pharmacy most of my life, but there is a very large Indian professional population there because they could make much more money in the US than in their native country. There are some blocks in the borough of Queens that have only Indian born Doctors for miles and miles. Maybe they have decided to cut prices to beat the competition.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    289. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      The docs.
      Can I get Medicare if I am under age 65?
      If you are under age 65 and disabled, and have been entitled to disability benefits under Social Security or the Railroad Retirement Board for 24 months, you will be automatically entitled to Medicare Part A and Part B beginning the 25th month of disability benefit entitlement. You do not need to do anything to enroll in Medicare. Your Medicare card will be mailed to you about 3 months before your Medicare entitlement date.

      What We Mean By Disability
      The definition of disability under Social Security is different than other programs. Social Security pays only for total disability. No benefits are payable for partial disability or for short-term disability.

      "Disability" under Social Security is based on your inability to work. We consider you disabled under Social Security rules if:
      You cannot do work that you did before;
      We decide that you cannot adjust to other work because of your medical condition(s); and
      Your disability has lasted or is expected to last for at least one year or to result in death.

      Question: How does the federal government define "disability"?
      The definition of "disability" varies depending on the purpose for which it is being used. Federal and state agencies generally use a definition that is specific to a particular program or service. For example:

      For purposes of nondiscrimination laws (e.g., the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Section 188 of the Workforce Investment Act), a person with a disability is generally defined as someone who (1) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more "major life activities," (2) has a record of such an impairment, or (3) is regarded as having such an impairment.
      To be found disabled for purposes of Social Security disability benefits, individuals must have a severe disability (or combination of disabilities) that has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months or result in death, and which prevents working at a "substantial gainful activity" level.
      State vocational rehabilitation (VR) offices will find a person with a disability to be eligible for VR services if he or she has a physical or mental impairment that constitutes or results in a "substantial impediment" to employment for the applicant.

      Who is eligible for Medicare?

      Generally, Medicare is available for people age 65 or older, younger people with disabilities and people with End Stage Renal Disease (permanent kidney failure requiring dialysis or transplant). Medicare has two parts, Part A (Hospital Insurance) and Part B (Medical Insurance). You are eligible for premium-free Part A if you are age 65 or older and you or your spouse worked and paid Medicare taxes for at least 10 years. You can get Part A at age 65 without having to pay premiums if:

      You are receiving retirement benefits from Social Security or the Railroad Retirement Board.
      You are eligible to receive Social Security or Railroad benefits but you have not yet filed for them.
      You or your spouse had Medicare-covered government employment.

      While most people do not have to pay a premium for Part A, everyone must pay for Part B if they want it. This monthly premium is deducted from your Social Security, Railroad Retirement, or Civil Service Retirement check. If you do not get any of these payments, Medicare sends you a bill for your Part B premium every 3 months.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    290. Re:Best care money can buy helps by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Medicaid doesn't actually pay for anything not related to medical care. There are multiple agencies one has to deal with, HUD, Social Security etc...

      Here is a link that shows what is covered by medicaid state by state. Medicaid Benefits: Online Database

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    291. Re:Best care money can buy helps by quenda · · Score: 1

      the option was perhaps 3 months of such high pain management ... compared to a few years of being able to actually do something with life.

      I don't understand. You make it sound clear-cut. Where is the dilemma? Was there a problem with your insurance? If the hospital did not have the treatment option, why did the doctor not transfer or refer the patient on? Isn't it normal and expected for a small hospital to transfer a patient with needs they cannot meet?

    292. Re:Best care money can buy helps by willaien · · Score: 1

      ...what does this have to do with the fact that there's a considerable amount of people that make too much to qualify for government-assisted medical care, but not enough to afford their own insurance?

    293. Re:Best care money can buy helps by witherstaff · · Score: 1

      Nope. I mean they will transfer some, but to go out of network means the patient's money no longer lands in that hospital's pocket, so is a rare thing. Then it's up to the patient to track down specialists or other hospitals outside of that hospital chain. In my area, all the smaller city hospitals have been purchased by a few hospital 'chains' if you will, large regional hospitals that gobbled up the smaller ones and now keep everything in house. For normal things this is fine, but you never know when you hit the limits of the hospital's ability and need to find additional help. Then there's added expenses of travel, being off work to get a consultation, and gets expensive fast since things like travel and stays are not covered by insurance typically. It's times like that when you're not sure how much you should trust any doctor.

    294. Re:Best care money can buy helps by billcopc · · Score: 1

      No. Eugenics would be preventing those people from breeding, and/or exterminating them outright. I'm just saying we should introduce subliminal messages to help keep them out of hospitals.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    295. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      ...what does this have to do with the fact that there's a considerable amount of people that make too much to qualify for government-assisted medical care, but not enough to afford their own insurance?

      Two things: 1. I think that you'll find that the number of people who can't afford insurance, as opposed to those who can afford but don't want to pay for it because they are young and healthy, is very small. 2. Anyone who shows up at a hospital with an emergency must be treated, irrespective of ability to pay.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    296. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Fox" and "News" should never be used in the same paragraph. "Fox" and "Propaganda", or "Fox" and "VERY Biased Reporting" might work, or just "Fox" and "Politically Biased Editorializing" would also do. UNbiased studies have found Fox "News" watchers are the least informed and least knowledgeable about objective facts, compared to the major networks.

    297. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      It's a little over 20% including sales taxes.

      That's not entirely fair as I also have a heavily subsidized Bachelor's degree in Engineering. (I had $0 in student loans when I graduated.)

      What is your total tax rate?

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    298. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to disagree with some of your statement there:
      Lawsuits do not generally amount to much, there is such a low percentage of Plaintiffs actually "winning" that it should hardly make a difference.
      As far as Malpractice insurance goes, Obstetricians are usually the highest paying and so that does reduce the numbers that are going or staying in that field.

      The charges that are passed on to the patient are inflated so as to cover the costs of those who do not have insurance. Therefore, either way we are all still paying. Why not go the extra step and socialize healthcare for all? I wouldn't mind my taxes going towards that. And it would keep the US competitive in business as businesses would not be paying extra for health insurance.

      Conservatives like to take away the funding for socialized programs that work like civil servants, Public schools, and social security and then say stupid things like "See? It's broken?". And thanks to politicians like Nixon and Reagan, Healthcare is becoming a service for the wealthy elite. In fact, an MDA that I work with thinks that only those who can afford to pay for healthcare should be entitled to it.

      It's funny to see the disconnect between a lot of the Doctors and the Patients. Many of the Doctors that I work with live in their 'gated' communities, take frequent vacations- even the Obstetricians. Their children will attend college prep schools. They have it so rough.

      As far as Fraud is concerned I do agree that there is some of that going on. It originates with the health care provider fraudulently documenting that they provided care (that was not given) and billing for it anyway.
      I hardly think patients falsifying their contact information either from shame or the unimaginable is the same as fraud. They are only fulfilling a basic need- TO SURVIVE. You know as in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. I hardly call that fraud.
        If you are a "Conservative", just try to forget that for a moment, now what would you do if something threatened YOUR existence?????

    299. Re:Best care money can buy helps by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Maybe if you're not well known enough and big enough the only way to compete is by being more reasonable? I also thought (and I could be wrong) that one of the reasons going to the doctor can be much more expensive in the US is because they get deals to prescribe certain branded medications. Maybe it works out better if the doctor is less biased? After all the NHS will generally try to avoid branded medications and use generics where possible because it's much cheaper.

    300. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      I also thought (and I could be wrong) that one of the reasons going to the doctor can be much more expensive in the US is because they get deals to prescribe certain branded medications.

      That happens with cheaper doctors too. Drug companies offer doctors incentives to prescribe medications (i.e. free pens, gadgets, equipment, pads, pre-printed prescription blanks, etc .) but that doesn't raise the cost to the patient (except if they have to pay cash for their meds instead of having some sort of insurance).

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    301. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. Posting anonymously for privacy reasons.

      I am in Canada too.

      Two years ago, my daughter, aged 6 at the time, complained about knee pain. We went to the family doctor, and he said some nasty things including flesh eating bacteria. He said we should go to the hospital emergency right away. We did, and it took some time for her to be seen (a common problem in Ontario: wait times), but was admitted to emergency for the night, and they booked a orthopedic surgeon to see her in the morning. He did, and decided to operate to drain the fluid. He send the fluid for culture. They still did not find what was wrong, but she was on antibiotic via IV. They did X-rays and could not see much. They finally did a bone scan (they inject a radioactive thing, let it be for a few hours, then she goes into a machine to scan the body). They found an active area in the long thigh bone, above the knee. Blood results showed that she had an elevated ESR (Erythrocyte sedimentation rate). So, she was battling an infection in the bone (Osteomyelitis, nasty and hard to treat).

      She staying in the hospital for a total of 8 days. Was seen by a pediatrician daily, and had all th above diagnostics and lab stuff done. They also put antibiotic in her all the time, and did daily blood tests.

      After she was dismissed, she was seen weekly by the pediatrician, and was on antibiotics for a total of two months I think.

      Total treatment cost: $0
      Total bed cost: $0
      Total medicine cost: $100 or so oral antibiotic after sending her home (not covered when not hospitalized).
      Other costs: $30 hospital parking for the first few days, then $10 a week reduced rate for inpatient. Plus $30 wifi access for me for a month.

      I don't know how much all that costs if we were not residents/citizens. But it is sure to be tens of thousands of dollars, added to the extreme stress of having your kid's health in jeopardy.

      So, government health care works for the real stuff.

    302. Re:Best care money can buy helps by khipu · · Score: 1

      We as a society must determine if we should take care of sick people or leave them to suffer and some will likely die prematurely. If we do treat the sick how we must determine how to pay for it. That is not a "luxury", that is reality. If we don't find a way to pay for the care then we can't treat the sick

      You're thinking of medicine in 20th century terms. The question is not "should we treat the sick", the question is "should we pay $250k so that someone with cancer has a 50% chance of living another 5 years".

      If we determine that we will not treat the sick then we must say so now. There is no middle ground here and the math does not lie. If some service costs money then someone MUST pay for it. There is no free lunch.

      But it is not a binary choice. A reasonable level of basic health care--treatment of common infectious diseases, simple malignancies, injuries--can be had for very little money, a few hundred dollars per person per year. It doesn't require sophisticated skills and can be covered with cheap, effective generic drugs.

      But that's not what Obama promised and that's not at all what the health care debate is about. What people actually want is gold-plated medical plans that give everybody access to the latest and greatest treatments. That is what is causing health care costs to spiral out of control, and that is at the root of the problem.

    303. Re:Best care money can buy helps by khipu · · Score: 1

      I agree. Right now, the US has just adopted a system similar to the German system prior to its introduction of catalogs and cost control measures. And that's just can't work. And, as you observe, implementing German-style controls on top of the US measure is likely politically infeasible. So the US has a real problem on its hands.

      I think what may happen in the US is that basic health plans cut back their services to a cheap bare minimum, and everybody who wants more needs to add additional features to their plan. I think that could be a good system, provided lawmakers ensure that people keep their insurance even if they lose their jobs, and that insurance companies can't wiggle out of their obligations like they are doing today.

    304. Re:Best care money can buy helps by khipu · · Score: 1

      You have to start somewhere. It's not pretty, and it's not perfect, but without a beginning, you're never getting there.

      But we haven't started. Obama has adopted the popular part that involves more spending, but done nothing effective to rein in costs. That is exacerbating the problem, not fixing it.

    305. Re:Best care money can buy helps by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      That's something I can't understand.
      Relying on health insurance as a benefit feels like putting all eggs into one basket. If you are suddenly out of a job you are also cut off from your health insurance? Is that how it works?
      Even if you simply change employers the paperwork vor the new insurance must be horrible.
      I have no clue how that works.

      But if you try to implement the German system as is in the US people will indeed show up on your doorstep with torches and pitchforks. We nearly did. Even though for completely different reasons.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    306. Re:Best care money can buy helps by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      I wasn't talking about non-medical care. I was disagreeing with:

      They are out of pocket for medical expenses above $3,000/y either way.

      In fact, the link you quote above lists the cost cap for inpatient hospital care as $200,000/year. It also lists coverage of up to 6 months of hospice care, in addition to covering several other types of long-term care not included in direct medical coverage caps.

    307. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      can't afford their own healthcare

      So your solution is to force others at gunpoint to do it? I'm all for helping others but making it mandatory is evil. The ends don't justify the means.

      Letting your fellow countrymen die on the street from wholly preventable conditions is a worse evil.

      Well said.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    308. Re:Best care money can buy helps by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      1,2,3 do contribute to the costs, but I've never seen any study that delivered concrete numbers on their overall impact.

      I can tell you, having worked in a hospital that was bought out as a solution to an impeding bankruptcy (which changed the hospital from non-profit, to for-profit, which lead to 50% downsizing and the removal of any service that wasn't making a profit), that the number one reason many hospitals go out of business is because of ER costs. You have to take care of someone, regardless of insurance or ability to pay. In communities with migrant workers, or poor populations, it is nearly impossible to break even. You either have to charge more across the board, driving up everyone's cost, or cut any service that doesn't make a healthy profit. In most cases, its both.

      That means things like dialysis go bye bye. As do as sorts of 'wellness' programs, elderly education, etc...

      For-profit and health care just fundamentally don't play well together. And sticking a middle man in between the actual health care and the money used to pay for it just drives the costs up even higher.

      It can't be coincidence that every single modern industrialized nation has national health care. It just plain makes more sense.

    309. Re:Best care money can buy helps by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      You can call it a straw man just like you can claim I'm a jellyfish. But I'm not, and my comment wasn't.

      Welcome to reality, deal with it. You can either care for the sick or not. If you choose to care for them, you have to pay for it. If you have to pay for it, you must determine how. If you don't want to have the state pay for the the health of those who cannot afford it themselves, then you've chosen not to care for them.

      Next time, present a logical rebuttal.

      Actually, you'd be more accurate if you said:

      "If you choose to care for them, you have to pay for it. "
      "If you choose to not pay for them, you end up paying for them anyway via emergency rooms, which drives the costs up for everyone, as it is the single most inefficient and costly way of providing care to the sick".

    310. Re:Best care money can buy helps by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      True, but if someone were going to accept that point, they wouldn't have argued the point he did. Besides, I'm sure anyone who's experienced modern emergency care in most cities in north america would agree that not only is it inefficient cost-wise, but also medically.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    311. Re:Best care money can buy helps by khipu · · Score: 1

      How does that response relate to what I suggested? What I suggested is that everybody is covered, but that that coverage is very basic: antibiotics, simple surgeries, preventive care, simple palliative care. You would need to buy additional coverage privately to cover things like transplants, heart surgery, aggressive cancer treatment, etc.

  2. A Inspiration to all by hardburlyboogerman · · Score: 3, Funny

    Happy Birthday,Professor Hawking.Your efforts have made physics and science cool.

    --
    Geek Hillbilly
    1. Re:A Inspiration to all by Tim4444 · · Score: 1

      Yesterday... just FYI

    2. Re:A Inspiration to all by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 2

      A not that brief history of time.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    3. Re:A Inspiration to all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you. Let's celebrate the achievements of a scientist with extraordinary abilities, extraordinary determination and extraordinary luck.

  3. All the power to him by vxone · · Score: 1

    Stephen Hawking - is a great person and he has time and again proven many scientists wrong they contently impose stereo types on him because of his appearance or disease and he has made fools of them! Good for you! Stephen Hawking all the power to you :)

    1. Re: All the power to him by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > he has time and again proven many scientists wrong

      Err, what?

      You could start by listing such occasions here:

    2. Re: All the power to him by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      We're not here to educate the intentionally ignorant, look it up, it's easy to find.

    3. Re: All the power to him by Sarius64 · · Score: 0

      We're here to be pompous assholes that laugh in the face of American sacrifice that has protected the Earth from crazy people time and time again.

      Here, fixed that for you.

      Seriously, screw the lot of you. I'd bet Mr. Hawking's parents had a different viewpoint.

  4. Amused being an example of "death panels". by jo_ham · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Remember when he was held up as a textbook example of the types of people who would "not survive" under a universal healthcare system?

    Until, of course, he pointed out that not only was he born in Britain under such a system, but that he owes his life to it many times over.

    The retractions on those stories (those who even bothered to correct them) were amusing.

    I still think his most significant contribution to mankind is teaming up with Pink Floyd ;) What's a PhD when you can be a rock star? (Brian Cox and Brian May, quiet you!)

    1. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by GauteL · · Score: 5, Informative

      "*Ahem* you don't know a thing about ALS, do you ? He was probably perfectly healthy until 21, at which point 1 diagnosis was (and is) pretty much all that could be done. As for disability aids, those were designed, operated and built by his "employer".
      And as far as I believe that house he has as part of his position comes complete with a butler (read : he gets to hire someone for that)."

      Rather than speculate, let us read Stephen Hawking's own words about his debt to the NHS.

      The telling paragraph:
      "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS," he said. "I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived."

      I would say the last sentence qualifies as evidence for the parent's statement about Stephen Hawking owing his life to the NHS.

    2. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      ...or he's part of the 5% of cases where his diaphragm doesn't give out and he doesn't die of lung failure?

    3. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's not forget his other musical contributions to gangsta rap!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89jt7zJzkNQ

    4. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by jo_ham · · Score: 2

      I take it you've never actually *read* anything written by Stephen himself.

      I'm paraphrasing his own words.

      Well, why paraphrase when you can quote:

      "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS, I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived."

    5. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Petron · · Score: 0

      I wonder if he would of had the same coverage if he was a manager of a Fish & Chips with no public light... or if they would of let him go silently into the night...

      --
      if (it != oneThing) it = another;
    6. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember when he was held up as a textbook example of the types of people who would "not survive" under a universal healthcare system?

      Until, of course, he pointed out that not only was he born in Britain under such a system, but that he owes his life to it many times over.

      The retractions on those stories (those who even bothered to correct them) were amusing.

      I still think his most significant contribution to mankind is teaming up with Pink Floyd ;) What's a PhD when you can be a rock star? (Brian Cox and Brian May, quiet you!)

      erm he didn't team up with pink floyd bud, he teamed up with Roger Waters on the Radio Kaos concept album... close but no cigar :P

    7. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by jo_ham · · Score: 5, Informative

      In what respect? The healthcare he received you mean?

      That's the beauty of a universal healthcare system - everyone has access to the same treatment. They didn't treat him specially because he had international fame (in fact, the fame didn't come until later - it didn't affect his treatment by the NHS at all).

    8. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Remember when he was held up as a textbook example of the types of people who would "not survive" under a universal healthcare system?

      Until, of course, he pointed out that not only was he born in Britain under such a system, but that he owes his life to it many times over.

      The retractions on those stories (those who even bothered to correct them) were amusing.

      I still think his most significant contribution to mankind is teaming up with Pink Floyd ;) What's a PhD when you can be a rock star? (Brian Cox and Brian May, quiet you!)

      erm he didn't team up with pink floyd bud, he teamed up with Roger Waters on the Radio Kaos concept album... close but no cigar :P

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keep_Talking

      Ok, so he was sampled, but that's the song I was thinking of.

    9. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Nimey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I suspect you'd find that most of these idiots repeating the "death panel" meme are those who themselves would have let Hawking die as a young academic, to save money.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    10. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 2

      I love how people will still argue this point. America deserves to suffer unnecessarily because they are so afraid of someone else getting something "for free" that they are completely blind to the fact that they also could and should be receiving the same for how much they currently pay (actually less when taxes and average healthcare costs are factored in). Universal healthcare in the US will never happen and if it does it will be ruined by lobbyists and big pharmacy/healthcare which will ensure it is a failure and then everyone will scream about how they were right and it doesn't work. Mindless.

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    11. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      i can give you a personal example of the FANTASTIC care available on the NHS here in Scotland

      i was diagnosed with cancer in my bowels due to some villeous adenomas gone back. within a week of the diagnosis i was in an NHS hospital in Edinburgh getting them removed.

      i then had a course of chemotherapy which was a wonderful treatment which didn't cause hair loss.. apparently the same stuff Iain dury had.. his cancer however was too far gone for it to help sadly but it certainly worked for me

      ALL my treatment in hospital and the support care at home along with counselling, as i am telling you, NOTHING shakes the foundations of your being like a brush with mortality with the big C.

      i also have arthritis in both my knees for which i get physio and medication and i paid NOTHING FOR ANY OF IT not even the medicines adn the standard of care was and if VERY high indeed.

      i have been told that due to the advanced crepitus in my left knee that i will have to have a new left knee in the next 18-24 months..... and that and the support and follow on care will be provided to me for free

      My kids were born at the new Edinburgh royal infirmary maternity unit,a fanfastic and very high tech and well appointed place with BRILLIANT staff.. again.. no charge.

      the follow on care for the kids.. health visits froma district nurse type that monitors the health of the child and offers advice and help was also free.

      i have paid my taxes and my national insurance payments and this is why i think it's a fantastic investment , not only for myself and my family but also from an employers point of view.......... a healthy employee is a happy and productive one especially when he doesn't have to worry about doctors or dentist fees

      the care and treatment i have had would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds if i had been in the likes of America where profit for the HMO's comes before giving a fuck about your fellow countrymen/women and children.
      long live the NHS and even though i am not a religious man at all .. bless them for the brilliant work that they do BECAUSE THEY CARE!

    12. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, he would. That's how socialised healthcare works. There are plenty of people in the UK and Europe who are not Stephen Hawking yet receive similar or even higher levels of care than Dr. Hawking does.

    13. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember when he was held up as a textbook example of the types of people who would "not survive" under a universal healthcare system?

      Until, of course, he pointed out that not only was he born in Britain under such a system, but that he owes his life to it many times over.

      Careful with what you say. Remember, you're (quite transparently) making passive-aggressive statements against the United States healthcare system. Emphasis on "United States".

      Meaning, what you're saying can easily be reinterpreted by the very very loud and stupid portions of the US* as "Look how evil universal healthcare is: It helped an EVIL SCIENTIST survive!!! *horror music sting* Yes, a SCIENTIST , who, by his very EVIL nature, wants to destroy the LORD GOD with his evil SCIENCE! "

      *: You know, the ones whose opinions are trivially malleable if an opinion can be phrased in terms of "fear the gummervints!" and/or "fear the not-the-same-religion-as-you!". The sort that actually fell for the "death panel" line.

    14. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I repeat the death panel meme for a very good reason.

      Congrats, you guys can point to one guy who survived despite the odds under NHS. Now, I have a lot of British friends. I used to have more, but they sadly were diagnosed with easily treatable forms of cancer. But the UK health care system dictates probability of survival with cost of treatment and determine what they're willing to pay for. And cancer, in the UK has poor survival rates, and treatment is expensive, so they don't do much.

      And before anyone spouts off, seriously, look up UK cancer survival rates. It's shocking. They have survival rates as bad as third world countries and are stead fast as the lowest survival rates of any first world nation, worst in Europe. They also do extremely bad when dealing with heart disease. US oddly enough has the highest cancer survival rates in the world. Hmmmm.

    15. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Alioth · · Score: 1

      The funny thing about these people who go on about "death panels" is they fail to mention that the US healthcare has death panels. Except the US healthcare death panel members are employed by private insurance companies, motivated by profit.

    16. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by khipu · · Score: 1

      That's the beauty of a universal healthcare system - everyone has access to the same treatment.

      Yes, but how much treatment? What average lifetime medical expense should we provide? And how do we control those costs? If everybody can consume arbitrary amounts of medical care at other people's expense, costs and premiums are going to continue to spiral out of control.

    17. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Nimey · · Score: 0

      Congrats, you can point to one statistic (without, oddly, sharing your data or any citation, or even logging in) that you claim backs up your prejudices.

      Your post is contemptible.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    18. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I support single payer health care but where you (and many others) lose out is when you claim that these things are free. They are not free. You have a government run health insurance program which you pay for in the form of taxes. I could go out and buy a health insurance plan with $0 copays, it could include disability coverage, long term care, etc. All things which are included in your universal health plan. Saying that it was free really makes the people who oppose single payer angry because it's clearly not free and it gives them ammunition to write you off as a liar and/or idiot who doesn't understand that you're paying for something. Note: I don't believe you're an idiot/liar, you're using the vernacular of many (most?) people under a single payer system.. yadda yadda.

    19. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by jo_ham · · Score: 2

      Compared to the US system which supposedly has that as a benefit, the UK system (which is far from perfect) is still *much* better off - we spend half the GDP per capita on healthcare compared to the US, and we cover everyone.

      I'm not saying that it's a utopian system like Star Trek, but universal healthcare brings down the cost for everyone, to the benefit of everyone, while providing excellent care. The only "downside" is that it requires a population to be altruistic - in that the "some people can freeload or live unhealthy lifestyles and who should I pay for them!!" can be difficult for some people to get past. The key, of course, is that by participating in such a system, even ignoring the "freeloaders" you are *better off personally* through reduced costs. Covering the less fortunate is a happy side effect/necessary evil (depending on which side of the spectrum you sit).

      Of course, you're still free to pursue private insurance if you don't feel the state is doing enough.

    20. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by operagost · · Score: 1

      How do posters with nothing more to contribute than straw men attacks get modded up here so often? It fascinates me.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    21. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Funny how you only complain about it when you disagree with the opinion posted.

      Maybe you could add to the discussion and suggest alternative reasons why idiots repeat the "death panel" lie instead.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    22. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by rhakka · · Score: 3, Interesting

      when you can use a service and pay nothing extra for it, you might forgive a person's use of the word "free". it's certainly accurate in terms of its impact on that person's life. especially when the tax is collected in proportion to your ability to pay, so it's not like it's a "fixed expense" to any given person.

      it's the ultimate insurance. everyone is in, no one is out, and there is no profit motive to denying you care, just a regard for the actual resources available. awesome.

    23. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by eldepeche · · Score: 1

      The point is that the system doesn't penalize people who get sick. If his care is "free," that means he doesn't risk financial ruin in addition to his health issues.

    24. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      That's not Pink Floyd! That's Rump Pink Floyd!
      Not wanting to rub it in but being a bastard: That's one of those "Pink Floyd" albums that actually has not traces of Roger Waters in it. So it is perfectly safe to listen to it if you are highly allergic to him.

      Also no traces of nuts. If you want those, I'd suggest Syd Barretts own "Opel".

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    25. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by euroq · · Score: 1

      If someone said that the police aren't free, then most people hearing that would assume that calling 911 would cost money, which it doesn't.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    26. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      If everybody can consume arbitrary amounts of medical care at other people's expense, costs and premiums are going to continue to spiral out of control.

      Your premise is broken. Not everybody has any need to "consume arbitrary amounts of medical care". Indeed, only a handful of people do.

    27. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by khipu · · Score: 1

      Your premise is broken. Not everybody has any need to "consume arbitrary amounts of medical care". Indeed, only a handful of people do.

      That used to be the case, but that's changing. It is getting to the point where many people can buy anywhere from a few extra weeks to a few extra years if someone is willing to pay, and those choices will increase: custom anti-cancer treatments, artificial organs, stem cell treatments, etc.

    28. Re:Amused being an example of "death panels". by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      The telling paragraph:
      "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS," he said. "I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived."

      Very short and very ill-attributed paragraph you have there. Here's a more detailed paragraph, also from the BBC, about his treatment :

      (source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8009804.stm )

      Professor Hawking was able to feed himself and get in and out of bed until 1974.
      Until that point he and his wife were able to manage without outside help, but then had to rely on live-in help from one of his research students.
      In 1980, he changed to a system of community and private nurses, who came in for an hour or two in the morning and evening.
      This lasted until he caught pneumonia in 1985, and had to have a tracheotomy operation.
      After this, he needed 24-hour nursing care.
      Before the operation, his speech had been getting more slurred, so that only a few people who knew him well could understand him.
      However, he could communicate. He wrote scientific papers by dictating to a secretary, and gave seminars through an interpreter.
      The tracheotomy operation removed his ability to speak altogether, and he had to rely on a small portable computer and a speech synthesizer fitted to his wheel chair.

      Note also that there is no known treatment (the causes are not known either, nor are the effects. It is not known why ALS patients usually die of pneumonia, aside from extremely general statements pointing out that ALS patients don't cough). Nurses and butlers are the only known form of even mildly effective treatment, and for some reason Hawking lived extremely long even for someone who does have full 24-7 personal care. Also his disease started up extremely late in his life compared to other patients : he got 21 years of near-normal living. And is still not on ventilation support at age 71. You have no idea just how rare it is for ALS patients to breathe on their own at age 25 ... He is about 10 standard deviations to the right of the bell curve. Are you claiming the NHS is responsible for that ? If so, they're limiting the good version of their care to Hawking alone.

      While the NHS probably partially paid for the operations mentioned above, does it really need to be said that care like Hawking received isn't available for all that many people in the UK. It's extremely disingenuous to hold up Hawking's care as an example of an NHS "success". Let's hold up Donald Trump's medical care as an example of the US health care system. Do you think that fair ? If not, why do you get to pull crap like that ?

      I actually have a friend that has ALS and trust me, the NHS does not assign someone 24-7 to look after him, never mind additional 2 technical assistants. Essentially, without a knowledgeable butler, he has about 0 chance to survive another 5 years. He will not get one. He's quite okay with that, but that's another matter.

      As for statistics : survivability of ALS in the US is 4-5 years while in the UK it's 3-4 years (shows again why Hawking is such a huuuugely exceptional case). Needless to say, both suck and the difference is so small it's probably a measurement error. Especially since the only treatment available is more people actively looking after the patient 24-7-365.

  5. Remarkable by overshoot · · Score: 5, Informative
    How many physicists have written best-sellers? About physics?

    To join in wishing him the best: may he live as long as life brings him joy, and joy for as long as he lives.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Remarkable by vlm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How many physicists have written best-sellers? About physics?

      Feynman, Gamow, Heisenberg all instantly come to mind as GOOD best seller physics popular science writers. There are probably a lot more BAD ones, example the new age quantum mech guy Zukav, but I can only instantly think of four good ones. You can troll by arguing about Greene, him being a string theorist means hes not a real physicist rather a theoretical mathematician, but he does live in the physics community despite mostly doing theoretical math, so I guess he counts. Lets call it five good ones.

      The puzzle is how come there are so many Physicist / Popular science book authors? In comparison, the biochemists have Asimov, and ... um yeah they've got Asimov, truly a great, yet only one individual. How about biologists? Other than the "poke a stick at the creationist nutters" of which there must be hundreds all writing the same thing, all they've got is Rachel Carson... So I ask again, how come there's so many best selling physicist authors?

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:Remarkable by HnT · · Score: 1

      God either wants to eliminate bad things and cannot, or can but does not want to, or neither wishes to nor can, or both wants to and can. If he wants to and cannot, then he is weak - and this does not apply to god. If he can but does not want to, then he is spiteful - which is equally foreign to god's nature. If he neither wants to nor can, he is both weak and spiteful, and so not a god. If he wants to and can, which is the only thing fitting for a god, where then do bad things come from? Or why does he not eliminate them?

      --
      "Only one thing is impossible for God: To find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." - Mark Twain
    3. Re:Remarkable by vlm · · Score: 1

      Your assumption is, god is good. If you remove your restriction, allow god to be an evil being, then quite a bit of atheist/agnostic theory evaporates (not all, just a lot).
      The quisling strategy of worshiping an evil god is not that great of an idea, but it does at least make much more sense.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    4. Re:Remarkable by homsar · · Score: 1

      a theoretical mathematician

      as opposed to an experimental mathematician?

    5. Re:Remarkable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Simply put, because of Carl Sagan. He made physics interesting to the general public and paved the way for the tons of physics documentaries out there today. Now there are a lot on the best seller list that you didn't mention, Michio Kaku, Brian Greene is a Theoretical Physicist (string theory is considered theoretical physics because it make predictions), and Neil DeGrasse Tyson to name a couple more. It really is amazing how Carl Sagan transformed how the scientific community treated the public from snobby and saying "they won't understand it, science is ours.' To "science is everyones."

    6. Re:Remarkable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God either wants to eliminate bad things and cannot, or can but does not want to, or neither wishes to nor can, or both wants to and can. If he wants to and cannot, then he is weak - and this does not apply to god. If he can but does not want to, then he is spiteful - which is equally foreign to god's nature. If he neither wants to nor can, he is both weak and spiteful, and so not a god. If he wants to and can, which is the only thing fitting for a god, where then do bad things come from? Or why does he not eliminate them?

      How would a world look like, where not only no evil things, but also no bad things could ever happen (and it's still a question what we want to count as "bad", but I forgo this question for sake of simplicity). I think, It would be a very static, predetermined world and living things could absolutely not have any free will.

      I use Leibniz' idea that we still live in the "best of all possible worlds". I presuppose a benevolent god here, one who wants and can eliminate bad things. But there is maybe a limit to god's omnipotence. Maybe god can create a world which is not static and pretermined and with humans still having free will. But this would be all "in his mind" only. In a real world with real physical properties, there's a limit how "good" the world can be (without being static or consisting of totally unconnected matter).

    7. Re:Remarkable by compro01 · · Score: 2

      As opposed to an applied mathematician.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    8. Re:Remarkable by beanyk · · Score: 1

      a theoretical mathematician

      as opposed to an experimental mathematician?

      As opposed to an Applied Mathematician.

    9. Re:Remarkable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The creationist-pokers turn out some nice writing, though. Someone like Dawkins isn't just famous for his anti-creationist writing; he really does write both well and interesting about the science in question. To be concrete: The Greatest Show on Earth is definitely a kick to creationism, but it's also an interesting and very readable walk back through the history of life.

      Put another way, the answer is "physicists don't have to deal with creationists whenever they publish anything".

    10. Re:Remarkable by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Or why does he not eliminate them?

      Because that would eliminate free will too.

    11. Re:Remarkable by vlm · · Score: 2

      Sagan was a great astronomer, not a physicist, although the crossover point between astrophysicist and astronomer and physicist is not in clear focus (bad pun). Sagan was a giant who stood on the shoulders of giants WRT to popular science writing... Check out Asimov's non-fiction back catalog, written before Sagan's time, its some good stuff.

      Now, yes string theory makes predictions, which are currently, maybe even permanently, untestable / unfalsifiable. Too high of energy level, take too long to run, take too much technology or money, etc. That's why they get made fun of a little bit by the real physicists. Creationism with formulae, etc. A perfectly interesting mathematical playground that does not interact with the experimental world is definitely great math but also is not physics. An abstract math idea that does not as far as we currently know contradict currently known physics is not necessarily "truth" or "reality" just by nature of non-contradiction. If they ever find anything they can run a falsifiable predictable experiment on, and it works, hey I'll be the first to toast him/them and celebrate, but till then its just an interesting math idea not a physics idea. And there's nothing wrong with that at all, as long as you categorize it appropriately as exotic math, not physics.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    12. Re:Remarkable by vlm · · Score: 1

      LOL everyone else replied the opposite of a theoretical mathematician is an applied mathematician, which is true, but a pretty good synonym for "experimental mathematician" is physicist, and/or some of the more theoretical engineers. Hard science papers crossed over from "mostly text" to "mostly equations/graphs" more than a century ago.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    13. Re:Remarkable by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      Stephen Jay Gould, but I have trouble thinking of others.

    14. Re:Remarkable by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 1

      Because that would eliminate free will too.

      Because letting people "choose" to be tortured horribly for eternity is a swell idea. Kind of like letting your kids "choose" to play on the freeway.

    15. Re:Remarkable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      c'mon, don't be silly.
      Stephen Hawking is just a shield, a brand name for a gov-sponsored group of physicists who sell their stuff to the public under the name of a "genius". The poor guy himself lost his cognitive abilities decades ago. Check out who his "wife" is and who's she working for. And besides, all those so called "achievements" are nothing more than just mathematical masturbation with no practical application and not even a solid scientific basis. This "genius" invented "mass ejecting black holes" to patch up the idiotic "big bang" theory that only still exists because a bunch of geriatric morons don't want to lose their pensions. And so another group of masturbators can continue to study "what happened in the first one-millonth of a second after the big bang".
      Pathetic.

  6. The man has focus by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Given a reason to live he sure hasn't wasted the opportunity. I'm betting he's never even read slashdot, let alone posted here.

    Where as I... oh crap!

  7. Misdiagnosed? by vlm · · Score: 2

    I wonder if he was misdiagnosed and has something else? That would be embarrassing.

    Another option is the disease might kill old people regardless of how young its diagnosed. I read up on this and the untold medical surprise is he was diagnosed at 21... most people get this diagnosis around 60 and die within a decade, in other words, around 70. Of course most people die around 70 anyway, plus or minus 20 years or so. Its quite possible if he dies around his current 70ish (Although I wish him well and I hope he lives to be a happy centurion, in the good morning america tradition, not the ancient roman tradition) the disease would none the less be consistent in killing people around age 70.

    For a similar yet completely unrelated example, genealogical research shows my ancestors uniformly seem to croak in the 80s from cardiovascular disease if nothing else gets them first (like warfare, farm accidents, etc), it just seems to be the scotsman/german way to go, I suppose you could diagnose me with that disease at age 5 if you want, and wait until I croak at 85 like most of my ancestors, but that wouldn't be a medical miracle, more of a very likely prediction.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Misdiagnosed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think the word you were looking for was centenarian.

    2. Re:Misdiagnosed? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

      ALS is well understood to be a "highly variable" disease. Meaning, they know that they don't know what it's going to do - sucks when a loved one gets it because there's always that "glimmer of hope" that it will stop before it kills them, but in 99% of cases, that's not true at the 5 year mark.

    3. Re:Misdiagnosed? by Canazza · · Score: 1

      Septuagenarian surely...

      --
      It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
    4. Re:Misdiagnosed? by JonahsDad · · Score: 1

      Let us not forget that ALS is a Diagnosis of Exclusion. Rule everything else out, and it's the only thing left. Also means if doctors do find a definitive test for ALS, some patients previously diagnosed with ALS might have to be re-diagnosed.

  8. Desperate people .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not many people can afford full time staff to maintain their lives both personally and professionally. He has people so desperate to work with him that they train for years to understand his unique communication.

    That's what grad students are for!

    1. Re:Desperate people .... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Not many people can afford full time staff to maintain their lives both personally and professionally. He has people so desperate to work with him that they train for years to understand his unique communication.

      That's what grad students are for!

      At age 21, you are a grad student - barely.

  9. Creationists by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The funny thing is that I've heard a lot of creationists saying his condition is a result of defying God (by being a scientist apparently). If I were a creationist, then the fact that he's defied his condition for half a century would tell me that either 1) Hawkings is stronger than God or 2) someone up there is looking out for.

    But I'm not a creationist, so I'll chalk it up to his willingness to fight and his access to good healthcare. And maybe random dumb luck.

    1. Re:Creationists by DigitalReverend · · Score: 1

      As someone familiar with the more extreme religious crackpots out there, they would simply say that judgment happens after someone dies and the fact he is still alive has nothing to do with what awaits him.

      --
      I read Slashdot for the headlines, because the headlines, unlike the articles, are usually original and never duplicated
    2. Re:Creationists by heathen_01 · · Score: 1

      Hawkings is (a) god, or at the very least a demi god.

    3. Re:Creationists by JoeMerchant · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But I'm not a creationist, so I'll chalk it up to his willingness to fight and his access to good healthcare. And maybe random dumb luck.

      I've worked in and around medical devices and healthcare for 2 decades, and in that time I've seen a whole lot of "use it or lose it" principle in halting disease progression. It is certainly no guarantee, but odds are better that you will be able to keep doing something if you keep doing it. Basically, "bed rest" is evil and should be avoided at every opportunity.

      A whole lot of "good healthcare" is social support, keeping the patient active - sort of the opposite of your typical ICU experience.

    4. Re:Creationists by mrsurb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm a Christian but not a creationist. I have a degree in physics and a degree in theology. And I thank God for Stephen Hawking and the insight that his incredible mind has given us into the universe, despite his defiance of God. I read his book "A Brief History of Time" and it blew my mind, it was one of the factors that led me to study physics. I used his latest book, "The Grand Design" in my honours thesis for my theology degree which was an investigation into the appearance of fine-tuning in the universe.

      Not looking for an argument, just want to point out that not all Christians have the anti-science attitudes that seem so prevalent in American evangelicanlism.

    5. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or 3) He is one of the 5%, or 1 in 20, that survives longer than a decade, and we've never heard of anyone in the other 95%.

    6. Re:Creationists by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They would say whatever crossed their mind, as long as it supported their sense of superiority and self righteousness, rationality and theology be damned.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    7. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can you please cite some of these creationists who are saying that Hawkings was struck with this illness due to "defying God"? I'd seriously like to see this because I really don't think this is the case and you're just using (yes, "using" is the term) Hawking to push your own social agenda.

    8. Re:Creationists by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The funny thing is that I've heard a lot of creationists saying his condition is a result of defying God (by being a scientist apparently). If I were a creationist, then the fact that he's defied his condition for half a century would tell me that either 1) Hawkings is stronger than God or 2) someone up there is looking out for.

      Whenever evil flourishes, the innocent and the righteous are slaughtered or struck by injury or disease the fanatics always rewrite reality until it fits their religion. The innocent weren't truly innocent, the righteous weren't truly righteous, evil exists as a punishment for our sins and so on. God is perfect and infallible so if you punched them in the face and said "If God didn't want you to get punched in the face, why didn't he stop me?" they'd secretly accept that as some sort of punishment or trial by God for their pride or to test their faith. If I'd given them a gracious donation to their church, they'd see it as a blessing from God.

      There's always some explanation that fits reality, and when it really doesn't you just say he works in "mysterious ways" that us humans can't comprehend. If he'd died, that is God. If he continues to live with the disease, that's also God prolonging it. If he'd been miraculously cured, that would be by the grace of God. It's like a game show with God behind every door, no matter which you pick. Religion is the anthropomorphization of reality, that behind everything there's an invisible man pulling invisible strings. And no matter what you say you can't prove the strings don't exist.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    9. Re:Creationists by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      I agree it's not all Christians by a long shot, but the most vocal (who also seem to be the most ignorant of what the Bible actually says) tend to speak out with crap like God punishing everybody who has a disease.

      It's been a while since I've read a Brief History of Time, but I believe he did mention God (or at least a higher power) at one point. I think he was basically saying that he wasn't ruling out God as the one who set the Big Bang into motion. Great book, along with The Universe In A Nutshell

    10. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit.

      "I've heard a lot of..." is just something you made up to disparage a group of people and tarnish a larger group of people. In short a straw man statement.

      You are using Hawkings to push your agenda and frankly,to be a bigot.

    11. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      despite his defiance of God.

      What defiance? The man just has a condition. You sound as bad as the creationists.

    12. Re:Creationists by residieu · · Score: 1

      And they really expect people to worship their asshole of a God?

      Yes, I designed the world specifically so it would appear to be billions of years old and put in elaborate clues with extinct animal fossils, and precisely positioned stars moving at exactly the right velocities. Then, when the intelligent people I designed use their God-given(you're welcome) brains to study these clues and piece together the history I've deliberately hinted at, POW!!! I hit the poor bastards with horrible diseases for daring to study my Creation.

    13. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a degree in physics and a degree in theology.

      You mean you only have one degree, in physics, right ?

    14. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Christian, let me state that It's not quite like that.

      Man's condition of being a mortal, aging being prone to sickness is the result of the disobedience of man's first parents (commonly "original sin") and the curse that is upon the earth. As a consequence, a righteous man or the worst degenerate may both come down with disease. However, it always happens for a reason within the big picture (which may not have anything to do with our particular actions) and those who know God can still rejoice and look forward to the life to come when we will be free from these things.

      Anyone who says Dr. Hawking is being punished must realize we are all being punished and are equally guilty before God. Anyone who is self-righteous has completely missed the point. Participating in Christianity on a visible level does not make you a Christian any more than bragging about the things you'd code in programming forums makes you a programmer. Jesus said there will be many on the last day who thought they "in the club" who will be turned away.

    15. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a lot of assumptions behind your statement and the OP has you eating it up. Funny to see how such a "scientific" person buys into obvious bigotry and carries it to the next level. Feel proud, your way of thinking in the rues of being a logical thinker has helped many tyrants carry out their plans unhindered for thousands of years.

    16. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we're all punished for our ultimate grandparents' sins. That's fair. Why do you worship this being?

    17. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how we can use the word 'they' to avoid the burden of having to distinguish and perceive nuance. I've got some extremes in my family and the OP is absolutelu correct about the ones I know.

      Don't fight a movement based upon generalizion and disdain for analysis with their own weapons. They'll win every time.

    18. Re:Creationists by AlecC · · Score: 1

      The funny thing is that I've heard a lot of creationists saying his condition is a result of defying God (by being a scientist apparently).

      Since he was diagnosed while still an undergraduate, God was certainly getting in his retaliation early.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    19. Re:Creationists by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      Amazingly, there are crackpots in all walks of life. I've never personally heard anyone say his condition is a result of defying God, and I'm from a good old right-wing denomination of Christianity, but I'm sure there are people out there who believe all sorts of stupid things. I've met scientists who are certain of all sorts of strange things, but a crackpot scientist quickly gets dismissed as 'not a scientist' by peers and eliminated from the equation. Being a Christian on the other hand only requires faith, and while some groups do, I don't believe in removing people from that circle if that's how they want to self-identify.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    20. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. Is it really that hard? OK, I'll help you out. Here's a link:

      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=stephen+hawking+punished+by+god

    21. Re:Creationists by phorm · · Score: 1

      I like to think of that "vocal group" as the PETA of the religious :-)

      Sometimes they have something useful to say, but they're too busy shouting in general for anyone to hear it.

    22. Re:Creationists by arkane1234 · · Score: 2

      Oh the bitter irony of your post...

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    23. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A rather extreme example of this kind of thinking is the reaction of the Phelps family to the case of Tim McLean, who was stabbed, beheaded, and cannibalized by the guy sitting next to him on a Greyhound bus in Manitoba a few years ago. It was a totally random act by a crazy man. However, the Phelps family, in their infinite stupidity, attempted to travel to Winnipeg to picket McLean's funeral. They knew nothing at all about the kid, but reasoned that such a horrific thing could only be a punishment from God, and therefore he must have been an incredibly evil person to deserve such punishment, and his death should be celebrated.

    24. Re:Creationists by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      from my upbringing I can tell you that, if someone the biblical fundamentalist creationist likes has illness, it's "oh, God is testing his beloved servant!". If it's someone they don't like, it's "God has smitten that vile sinner!". Always, for themselves it's "God is testing me, to refine me like gold!'.

    25. Re:Creationists by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      I'm a Christian but not a creationist. I have a degree in physics and a degree in theology.

      Obligatory Futurama reference.

    26. Re:Creationists by Tuan121 · · Score: 1

      Every time you capitalize god my comprehension of your post diminishes.

    27. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why waste your undoubtedly great intellect studying unicorns? Imagine what you could have accomplished had you not spent time on theology.

    28. Re:Creationists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh?

      You lost me on that one. Are there only portions of the bible you believe? I don't think it was meant to be pick and choose.

  10. Lame by BlackPignouf · · Score: 5, Funny

    No Nobel prize. Less range than a Prius. Lame.

    1. Re:Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      BlackPignouf said:

      No Nobel prize. Less range than a Prius. Lame.

      He still hasn't solved the most troubling mystery of Man. From Stephen Hawking himself:

      In an interview with the New Scientist ahead of his 70th birthday, he said he spent most of the day thinking about women, who he says are "a complete mystery"

      References:
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-16137007

    2. Re:Lame by tick-tock-atona · · Score: 1

      Awesome. :-D

    3. Re:Lame by necro81 · · Score: 4, Informative

      No Nobel prize

      Which at this point is surprising to me. He did pioneering work on the physics of black holes, and was the first to theorize on what is now called Hawking Radiation. That seems like a pretty good accomplishment. Do you suppose the relative lack of experimental confirmation keeps him from it?

      On the other hand, the Nobel committee has been known to overlook some rather obvious candidates. Einstein never received a Nobel for his work on relativity (special or general) or his contributions to quantum mechanics. His prize was given for his explanation of the photoelectric effect which, while an important contribution, most people don't know about.

    4. Re:Lame by AndyGJ · · Score: 1

      No Nobel prize. Less range than a Prius. Lame.

      Well played sir.

    5. Re:Lame by daid303 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Getting your name on a physics theory/phenomenon is a much larger accomplishment then a nobel prize. Who remembers nobel prize winners? I bet the list of scientists with names in physics that everyone knows is larger then the list of nobel prize winners that people know.

    6. Re:Lame by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Both points seem valid.

    7. Re:Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Einstein never received a Nobel for his work on relativity (special or general) or his contributions to quantum mechanics. His prize was given for his explanation of the photoelectric effect [wikipedia.org] which, while an important contribution, most people don't know about.

      No. Einstein didn't get the Nobel prize for relativity because they couldn't give it to him without *at least* also awarding Lorentz and Poincaré for special relativity and also awarding Hilbert for general relativity. When Poincaré died in 1912, a Nobel prize for relativity became impossible.

    8. Re:Lame by beanyk · · Score: 1

      No Nobel prize

      Which at this point is surprising to me. He did pioneering work on the physics of black holes, and was the first to theorize on what is now called Hawking Radiation. That seems like a pretty good accomplishment. Do you suppose the relative lack of experimental confirmation keeps him from it?

      I think that's more or less it. BH thermodynamics and evaporation are cool ideas, and Hawking has been fundamental in finding links between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. But it's still just an idea, and impossible to verify any time soon, unless something cool happens at the LHC.

    9. Re:Lame by m.ducharme · · Score: 3, Funny

      But only until you observe them.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    10. Re:Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does the Nobel prize prohibit posthumous awards?

      And if you can get a Nobel Peace Prize for not being George W. Bush, I think they can award prizes to men who made significant discoveries standing on the shoulders of other geniuses.

    11. Re:Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does the Nobel prize prohibit posthumous awards?

      Yes.

      And if you can get a Nobel Peace Prize for not being George W. Bush, I think they can award prizes to men who made significant discoveries standing on the shoulders of other geniuses.

      The Peace Prize is given by a completely separate committee from the real Nobel prizes.

    12. Re:Lame by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      Hey this guy is called Hawking, fancy finding a type of radiation with the same name!

    13. Re:Lame by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Hawking Radiation > Nobel Prize

      --
      Good-bye
    14. Re:Lame by WhitePanther5000 · · Score: 1

      According to "A Brief History of Time", as I recall, they wanted to nominate Einstein for his work on relativity. However, since it was not yet fully verified/accepted, they just nominated him based on his work for the photoelectric effect. But it sounded to me like relativity was the unofficial reason for his nomination.

    15. Re:Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because your theory must be tested successfully to be considered for the prize. That's why Einstein was basically rammed through the system the way he was. It really wasn't for photoelectrics.
       
      It's kind of like LoTR:RoTK winning best picture... it had nothing to do with the film itself, it was a tip of the hat for the entire trilogy.

    16. Re:Lame by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      I've not read the book but I seem to remember being told (during a lecture - I have a degree in Physics) that he wasn't nominated for Relativity because (at the time) it was too controversial; that may well correspond to "not yet fully verified/accepted".

    17. Re:Lame by WhitePanther5000 · · Score: 1

      I think you're right - its been awhile since I've read it and I don't have a copy handy at the moment, so I probably butchered the claim.

    18. Re:Lame by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      Einstein never received a Nobel for his work on relativity (special or general) or his contributions to quantum mechanics. His prize was given for his explanation of the photoelectric effect which, while an important contribution, most people don't know about.

      It could be that quantum mechanics was not a well-defined framework of physics back then. Nevertheless, it was clear that Einstein had made significant contributions to theoretical physics. In fact, his Nobel was not just for the photoelectric effect, although it was highlighted as the most notable of the contributions.

      Actually, a lot of the Nobel prizes seem to be awarded for experimental work. Essential contributions to science, but rarely big-picture explanations. We only have theories like the Standard Model of particle physics because of these individual contributors, and it is hard to pinpoint any single person or group behind such models. As others have pointed out already, Einstein was not the lone inventor of relativity, so it made sense to award him for more specific discoveries.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    19. Re:Lame by Sedated2000 · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming in this case, Hawking is simply quoting his favorite movie, Back To The Future II, in which Doc Brown states the exact same line.

    20. Re:Lame by guises · · Score: 1

      Who remembers nobel prize winners?

      Other physicists do. Seriously, it's a huge deal among physicists. Huge. More than one of my textbooks came with a list of nobel prize winners in the back alongside the periodic table, basic constants, etc. My professors would always point out when we discussed a topic for which someone got the prize.

      Hawking radiation only came up in class when a student brought it up. Granted I only had one course in cosmology, maybe it would be discussed more thoroughly if I had continued on that path, but there are a thousand different things with people's names on them. I'm not trying to be down on Hawking, but I think he's a little resented among physicists for his reputation.

    21. Re:Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you suppose the relative lack of experimental confirmation keeps him from it?

      Precisely. Look at the pathetic state of the cosmogony and theoretical physics - unintelligible mumbo-jumbo peppered with brain-dead mathematical monkey spanking. This "genius" hasn't produced anything of real practical value, ever. Modern theoretical physics lost touch with reality long time ago. This stuff cannot be confirmed experimentally and never will be. And on top of that, it appears he's just being used (or rather, his name).
      That's not to say I don't feel empathy for him or don't wish with him well.

    22. Re:Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He could use the money...

  11. comparison and life purpose by lkcl · · Score: 4, Interesting

    i think it would be an interesting study, even an informal one, to see how many other people have a physical condition that is listed as "unsurvivable within period X" and to see if there is a correlation between them "defying the predictions" and, as hawking himself puts it, having "something to live for".

    put another way: how many people have, on learning of their condition, literally lost the will to live, and how many took it as a challenge to fight for their right to life and a purpose?

    1. Re:comparison and life purpose by vlm · · Score: 1

      Losing the will would seem to imply a great reduction in stress, all I gotta do is lie here and die.
      Living would seem to involve stress.
      Supposedly more stress = earlier death in a simple linear relationship, but that may not be the case.
      Yet on the other hand, people who intensely meditate and would appear to spend less time stressing out, don't seem to live all that much longer.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:comparison and life purpose by aug24 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure I've seen this analysis (actually "fighting" a disease vs not, but it's close) and the correlation was nil.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    3. Re:comparison and life purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the book entitled "Man's Search for Meaning" by Victor Frankl provides interesting background on this topic.

    4. Re:comparison and life purpose by tibit · · Score: 1

      This is just a bunch of misconceptions. A condition is obviously survivable if you've got living examples of its survivability, I mean duh. Those religious people who are quick to call such low-probability survivals "miraculous" are quite silly because they place full, unchecked trust in an MDs opinion (or some statistics published somewhere, or a combination of both). I always have fun politely telling them that hey, perhaps they shouldn't be idolizing the MDs in question, and treating their word as the sole judgment that defines their veneration of something as miraculous...

      If there's one person who has survived an "unsurvivable" condition, then this makes such a condition permanently and forever after survivable. You see, it's a black-and-white thing, either it's survivable or it's not. One example is enough to move it into the survivable category. You can then speak of probabilities of survival, and people are notoriously bad at reasoning there. Apparently with ALS plenty of commenters on this story do not know much about demonstrated 30-year survivability -- and that one is not as bad as everyone thinks it is. 5% of people live 20+ years with ALS, that's freaking awesome if you ask me, and nowhere near the doom-and-gloom everyone has in their heads.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    5. Re:comparison and life purpose by schn · · Score: 1

      stress matters a bit especially in extremes but its guaranteed nowhere near a linear relationship. for example sufferers of debilitating diseases are vulnerable to depression related illnesses by being unable to pursue their previous interests. its impressive that hawking can be stimulated by almost purely mental work.

    6. Re:comparison and life purpose by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      This question is often asked by ethics departments. You have an ethical obligation to not lie to your patient as a doctor, even when lying to them could actually help their recovery. But you also have an ethical obligation to inform them of the best options available, which may include not telling them the severity of their condition.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    7. Re:comparison and life purpose by perl6geek · · Score: 1

      I know several persons who have drastically outlived their medical prognosis; none of them seem particularly driven compared to Hawking (but they do all enjoy to live). So the question is, are those predictions too pessimistic, or have all the other people with bad predictions died, and I can't meet them anymore?

    8. Re:comparison and life purpose by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      They're not predictions, they're statistical measures. If you're told "you have 6 months to live", it means the average person with your condition dies in 6 months. If it's based on a wide bell-curve is, you might die tomorrow or you might live another 20 years.

      It's like telling a newborn "you have 75 years to live" - on average, you're going to be roughly correct.

    9. Re:comparison and life purpose by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1
    10. Re:comparison and life purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His ALS hasn't fried his autonomic functions and his diaphragm yet; he can still breathe. He was also struck with it early; if I recall correctly, the sort of ALS that doesn't kill as quickly also has a tendency to strike earlier. It's like a different variety, though we have no explanation for the difference (we don't really have much explanation for ALS as a whole, though).

    11. Re:comparison and life purpose by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 1

      I don't know, given that you end up paralized except for your eyes I don't know if I'd want to live 20 years like that. (Ok, here's a horror for all of you on Slashdot. That means no video games.)

      --
      Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
  12. Shroedinger explained this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    they havent opened the box yet. He's a mint collectors edition

  13. The reason for his survival is obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Stephen Hawking has achieved quantum immortality.

    1. Re:The reason for his survival is obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stephen Hawking has achieved quantum immortality.

      Bah! That's only a subjective immortality. But I'm certainly happy that I am in one of the many multiverses where he has survived to 70. :)

  14. Genius? by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

    Funny guy.

    You have to have a particularly large set of balls to doubt that Professor Hawking is a genius.

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    1. Re:Genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny guy.

      You have to have a particularly large set of balls to doubt that Professor Hawking is a genius.

      That quote was from Hawking himself.

    2. Re:Genius? by vlm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      LOL thats Hawking himself who wrote "Whether I'm a genius is more open to doubt".
      He's a humble guy despite all he's done. Basically an anti-politician. That's what would make him a great national leader, if he wanted to do that. Him being smart enough to not want to take a bite of that sh1t sandwich says a lot about the current world situation.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  15. He should guest appear on Big Bang Theory.... by realsilly · · Score: 1

    Then he could add Television star to his profile. I think that could be a great episode, especially to mark his birthday and all of his scientific achievements.

    --
    Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
    1. Re:He should guest appear on Big Bang Theory.... by LastGunslinger · · Score: 1

      Hasn't he appeared on The Simpsons more than once?

    2. Re:He should guest appear on Big Bang Theory.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hasn't he appeared on The Simpsons more than once?

      And he appeared on Star Trek: TNG

    3. Re:He should guest appear on Big Bang Theory.... by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Informative

      Stephen Hawking has appeared on The Simpsons, Futurama, and Star Trek TNG, giving him a Bacon Number of 3 and a Bacon-Erdos Number of 7.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    4. Re:He should guest appear on Big Bang Theory.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget his appearance on the Dilbert TV series. Well, ok, that whole series is probably best forgotton!

    5. Re:He should guest appear on Big Bang Theory.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Been there, done that.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking_in_popular_culture#Appeared_as_himself

  16. healthcare + diet + lifestyle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretty decent healthcare. As far as I know, he gets just better than average NHS care. Nothing special. (this includes a semi-permanent helper(s))

    His diet is liquid if I am remembering correctly.
    Liquid diets are extremely efficient sources of food intake. Soups are incredibly healthy for you, and various other liquid meals.
    Since these diets would probably be prepared a certain way to have most, if not all, minerals, it most likely more healthy than traditional liquid diets.

    His lifestyle involves doing something he has an absolute passion for.
    He doesn't let his condition get him down. He thinks positively.
    He is also very mentally active due to the discipline he is in as well, which also keeps his heart active, which would normally end up incredibly weak over the years of inactivity.
    These are clinically shown to improve a persons health. The opposite also shows highly detrimental effects to a persons body, immune especially.

    He could well hit the 100 if his illness doesn't get any worse, just by these alone.

    1. Re:healthcare + diet + lifestyle by tibit · · Score: 1

      What a bunch of brouhaha. Excitement will raise your heart rate all right, so you can technically alter the heart rate with nothing but your mind. But raised heart rate is not what makes your heart "active", and your heart won't get "weak" if you keep your heart rate low. Physical exercise changes way more besides just heart rate -- the peripheral circulation flow rates change due to heightened metabolism in the muscles, there's a bunch of endocrine stuff that regulates all that, your breathing goes up, etc. Your mind alone cannot simulate effects of exercise, sorry. Heart itself is a very special organ and it gets exercised all the time -- it's never off. Whatever you claim to be clinically shown is not, it's some bs you're repeating. The "will to live" does not improve outcomes. And when it comes to someone with ALS who can't really move of his own accord, there's very little effect that person's thinking will have on the outcome.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  17. Honorary Degrees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That seems like a bit of an insult. We know you're a brilliant guy who earned real degrees through hard work and a brilliant mind. We'd like to slap a meaningless extra degree on you so we can try to pretend to be some part of your genius.

    Aren't honorary degrees for celebrities who couldn't have earned the real thing?

    1. Re:Honorary Degrees? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Technically, 'honorary degrees' are considered valid accomplishments.....The mythbusters have honorary degrees and thier fanbois squeal when you point out that it that it means squat in the real world.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:Honorary Degrees? by bussdriver · · Score: 1

      The mention of Honorary Degrees in the summary is a troll for comments as those of us who earned REAL degrees dislike how it undermines and trivializes them. Make it an award but do not call it a degree! Also stop calling everything engineering.

  18. Hawking: I would not be alive without the NHS by chrb · · Score: 5, Informative
    Stephen Hawking: I would not be alive without the NHS. This was his response to the amusing mistake by U.S. financial newspaper Investor's Business Daily, which claimed that Stephen Hawking was American, and that if Stephen Hawking were British, he would be dead.

    The controlling of medical costs in countries such as Britain through rationing, and the health consequences thereof, are legendary," read a recent editorial from the paper. "The stories of people dying on a waiting list or being denied altogether read like a horror script...

    "People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the UK, where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."

    Stephen Hawking both British and not dead.

    1. Re:Hawking: I would not be alive without the NHS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he's British why doesn't he talk with a British accent?

    2. Re:Hawking: I would not be alive without the NHS by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Were he American, he would probably be living in a 1 bedroom slum with 3 or 4 other medical pariahs. Crazy politicians would be lamenting his terrible sense of entitlement because he blinked (slowly) in morse code that he would like a new battery for his no longer working wheelchair.

    3. Re:Hawking: I would not be alive without the NHS by mike1210 · · Score: 0

      As I've written in this thread, I'll bet that Stephen Hawking has really, really good private health coverage. There's no way that he's going to let himself die in a third-world NHS hospital such as Mid Staffordshire, though he should damn well be required to.

    4. Re:Hawking: I would not be alive without the NHS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think God is keeping him alive so that he can rethink fully if God does or doesn't exist after all.

  19. 2 words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Michio Kaku

  20. Unit of measurement: millihawkings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I heard a visiting physics professor speak about sales of his own book in millihawkings.

  21. I've heard too much about waiting lists by doug141 · · Score: 1

    to think highly of the British model. There was just a story hear about a custom iphone app for the PM that tells him the waiting list. I recall seeing lines for a dentist. I can't fathom either.

    1. Re:I've heard too much about waiting lists by MattBD · · Score: 1

      To be honest, most of that is the complete bullshit dug up by the likes of the Daily Mail.

    2. Re:I've heard too much about waiting lists by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      to think highly of the British model. There was just a story hear about a custom iphone app for the PM that tells him the waiting list. I recall seeing lines for a dentist. I can't fathom either.

      The difference is in the UK you are on a waiting list. While in the US you're simply foregoing treatment completely (or are maybe going to an emergency room).

      If you're in the financial position to get care in the US, you'd be in the financial position not to have to wait in the UK.

  22. It is because Americans are optimists by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Europeans are pessimists, we pay for universal healthcare and unemployment benefits because IT (doom, despair and misery) could happen to us.

    Americans are optimists, they hate spending a penny on someone else because IT (the lottery, the dream job, the inheritance) could happen to them.

    To me the American is the homeless guy during election year that a EU news crew always find who explains why taxes on the rich are bad. Americans fundamentally believe in the American Dream.

    EU people really ain't better human beings, they just think that a better social safety net is good for THEMSELVES. I don't pay taxes to support the unemployed or physically/mentally handicapped because I care for them, I care for myself and think I benefit the most from a society in which they are cared for and I am cared for if it happens to me.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:It is because Americans are optimists by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

      Yes. We believe in a fairy tale that statistically will effect a small percentage of us instead of a logical and pragmatic system that applies to each and every one of us 100% and for our entire life. Brilliant! Some might call it optimism, I'd call it idiocy. Although, it doesn't surprise me since the vast majority also believe an invisible man has direct power over everything from wars to football games... and is always on "their" side.

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    2. Re:It is because Americans are optimists by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      Tebow could never be wrong.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    3. Re:It is because Americans are optimists by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Yes, well, you do paint an awful lot of people with an awfully broad brush. I could refute that by pointing out the popularity of the lottery in Germany and famously in Spain or the proverbial dead long-lost Uncle from America who left you a fortune annd the 99% protesters who are anything but optimistic.

      And judging by your last sentence I couldn't tell if you are a Euro or US citizen. But you are correct on the EU news crews intervieing stupid Americans. The truly ludicrous is better news than the softly spoken, insightful answer you'd get otherwise.

      To me, interviews are NOT a good way to form an opinion on a culture. The ones that get broadcast are always the interesting ones. Stupid, loud, shrill, dumb representing the subset of the population that actually has those properties. Or talking to a person on a bad day. Or several species of small furry animals gathered together in a cave and grooving with a Pict. Those soundbite interviews don't even say a lot about the interviewee but a lot more about video editing.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    4. Re:It is because Americans are optimists by euroq · · Score: 1

      Quite an insightful statement. I've read a similar sentiment in The Economist. Of course, this way of describing it sounds quite romantic, but in fact, the US homeless guy is quite stupid for voting for lower taxes for the rich because he might win the lottery. At least to me, anyhow.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
  23. Bad Title by AlecC · · Score: 1

    Neither the summary nor the article tell us how Hawking has survived, only that he actually has survived, against professional expectation. I am pleased that he has survived, and greatly admiring of his achievements. But, as far as I can see, we have no idea why he has survived 50 years of a disease that usually kills within five.

    --
    Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
  24. They refuse to get an idea. They are ideologically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    blinded. I married a European and as a result have been able to fly over there to get care. My experiences there have been far better, at far lower cost, than any I've ever had in the U.S. The equipment is newer and in better condition. The staff are friendlier, take more time to talk to you, and do better/cleaner jobs with procedures. The overhead of paperwork is far lower. There's a reason I am willing to fly across the Atlantic for medical and dental these days.

    Tell it to an American and they will simply invent untruths to aid in their not believing you. Either you're lying or you have some kind of undue influence or they're treating you better because they know you're an American and they want to impress you so that you'll help them to immigrate into the U.S. (yes, I've been told that), or umpteen other nonsensical things. The only thing that they won't believe is the Occam's Razor case. The care is simply better because the system simply works better.

    No, that couldn't possibly be it. Everyone knows that that eurosocialistcommunisttotalitarianantiamerican system is completely dysfunctional because biggovernmentneverworksandsocializedmedicineistheultimategovernmentboondogle.

    Americans are just that way. There's a reason we're increasingly the laughing stock not just of Europe (where we've always been seen as quaint and ridiculous) but now even in places like the Pacific Rim and parts of Latin America that we still believe engage in a kind of colonial worship of us.

  25. Not to mention by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    the uses of his name in Science Fiction novels.

    People will find ways to honor him because people respect him, some are in awe, but he is truly a rare person.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  26. Physically challenged genius by Liquid+Len · · Score: 1

    I've always wondered if he would have been so successful without his illness. If he hadn't suffered from MND, I imagine he would have had various activities and maybe he would have diluted his precious time between numerous tasks. I suppose that to qualifiy as what people call a "genius", you have to be very smart and work all day (either by discipline or by being forced to do so, as in his case). In other words, what if myself, a modest scientist was suddenly forced to think about physics all day long rather than share my time between scientific work, administrative burden, and more mundane tasks (including family and leisure), would I be more successful ? I've always doubted that, but I don't think I'll never get an answer to this.

    1. Re:Physically challenged genius by Mithent · · Score: 1

      I imagine that he wouldn't have been as famous, at any rate. There are plenty of people who make extremely worthwhile contributions to their fields, but don't have the kind of fame that Stephen Hawking has. I'm sure that the fact that he has accomplished so much despite his disability amplifies his achievements.

    2. Re:Physically challenged genius by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      He is famous because he wrote books for punters. The great illustrated history of the universe and everything. It could even be read by fine arts majors. No need for at least 4 years of education to simply understand the cover sleeve blurp.

      It could very well be that others have made bigger contributions and I couldn't be bothered to dreap up a measurement for that.

      Well, ok, I can be bothered. I propose as a unit of measurement for contribution to humanity and the whole lot:


      The stephenhwaking!


      And thus he contributed one stephenhawking to humanity and the lot.
      Now your turn: how much did for instance Feynmann contribute? In stephenhawking please since we have already established that Stephen Hawking contributed one stephenhawing and I wouldn't want all that hard work I did there go to waste.
      :p

      --
      20 minutes into the future
  27. This might be the study you seek by twmcneil · · Score: 2

    http://books.google.com/books?id=ZekSOAAACAAJ&dq=inauthor:%22Sharon+B.+McNeil%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=BhoLT8r-FNKutweAneTQBg&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA

    I happen to know about this thesis as my wife is the author. Her interest in the subject arose from her own experiences as survivor of childhood cancer with a 1% chance of survival. That's right, she had a 1% chance of surviving her cancer and somehow did. She has gone on to be a Pediatric Oncology Nurse and is now working on her PhD. She has personal, formal and vocational experience in this area.

    Being familiar with her thesis, I can tell you that she found no significant correlation between hope and survival.

    As you say you would find such a study interesting, I recommend you read her thesis. It does a good job of defining hope and offers many sources for further study.

    --
    "The ferrets, they're every where I tell you!"
  28. Something interesting to do by PeterJFraser · · Score: 1

    I have assumed that he has lived because he had something interesting to do, which gives him the will to live. I think most people who have the disease just want to die.

  29. Public Healthcare System That Works? by littlewink · · Score: 1

    Where is that? All the Public Healthcare Systems in every country I am aware of are going bankrupt.

  30. Homogeneity by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    State-run (or highly supervised) health care systems only seen to work well in homgenious societies such as in Northern Europe. I really do believe the all too common human factor of fearing / resenting those that aren't like yourselves are at the core of right-wing dismantling (NHS in Britain) and blockade (Public Option in the US): 'we' don't want 'them' to benefit, lest 'they' take over even more quickly - and punish us for our past treatment of 'them'.

  31. Ka Pow! by paiute · · Score: 1

    The Hawkman popped a cap in that disease's ass.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Ka Pow! by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      The disease shot first :(

      --
      20 minutes into the future
  32. "Free" Healthcare? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where the hell do you people get the idea that all of this costs nothing?

    The money to pay all of these people in the hospital has to come from somewhere.

  33. Re:They refuse to get an idea. They are ideologica by bfandreas · · Score: 1

    ... There's a reason we're increasingly the laughing stock not just of Europe (where we've always been seen as quaint and ridiculous) but now even in places like the Pacific Rim and parts of Latin America that we still believe engage in a kind of colonial worship of us.

    Don't take names to yourself. Europe has gone through a lot an the US is still relatively young. Those are teething problems.

    Which of course is offensive sanctimonious bullcrap.


    The truth is it is simple bashing what we don't understand. Which is stupid. It's the nature of the ape of flinging poo at each other. But we have become better apes so we manage to throw poo all over the Atlantic. Either way.

    Could be worse. We could still threaten to fling nuclear missiles, Kissinger or Genscher at each other.

    --
    20 minutes into the future
  34. I don't know, it's sounds like it's more luck than by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 1

    anything else. I mean ALS is pretty much untreatable. He's gotten the tracheostomy and a feeding tube but that's pretty standard for ALS. (Although in the US it's hard to get a nursing home if you have a tracheostomy.) I read the article and couldn't find anything unusually that would explain why he's lived this long. (A long guess is maybe his 24 hr nurse can pick up on pneumonia far quicker to make sure he doesn't get really bad but then again does the NHS give all ALS patients their own 24 hr nurse?)

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
  35. First of all, you are a troll... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Second... Oh... where to start...

    For a prominent one, Terry Pratchett has early onset Alzheimer's but can't be put on medications for it because he's too young. That's bureaucrats overriding medical science. Socialized health care isn't interested in improving the quality of life. As a consequence, he will likely be taking his own life soon-- amusingly, in Switzerland. I guess assisted suicide isn't covered in the UK.

    How about that the said drug is now actually recommended?
    Or the fact that actually there were no limitations to the availability of the drug to anyone, as you could still pay for it yourself (only you'd have to pay the whole thing out of your pocket, or your private insurance's pocket), and particularly not to Pratchett who is a bloody millionaire.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NICE#Cost_per_quality-adjusted_life_year_gained

    He or she could opt to take the free NHS standard treatment, or he or she may decide to pay out of pocket to obtain the benefit of the new treatment from a different health care provider. If the person has a private health insurance policy the person could check to see whether the private insurance provider will fund the new treatment. About 8% of the population has some private health insurance from an employer or trade association and 2% pay from their own resources.

    So that bullshit about him thinking of hopping over to Switzerland to kill himself BECAUSE the ebil soil-she-lized gubermint won't let him have his life saving pill... nice troll.
    No... really. Lovely.
    Not quite on the holocaust denier level, but close. And it has more charm.

    Now... Unlike you, Pratchett is not in it for trolling.
    He made the comments about the drug as he is concerned that, unlike him, there are actually people out there who can't afford the extra 2.5 pounds per day cost.
    Interestingly, while the Aricept/Donepezil's "cash-and-carry" price is 800-1000 pounds per year in the UK (about 1500$), up until recently it cost twice as much in the USA.
    While the high price has primarily to do with patents, I'll leave it to you to ponder how the same drug could cost twice as much in a country which has SIX times greater population (higher demand, ergo - should cost less) and only ~1.4 times greater purchasing parity GDP per capita.

    Socialized health care isn't interested in improving the quality of life.

    Funny you should phrase it like that.

    See... the ACTUAL issue that caused Pratchett to speak out about the NHS policy on the said drug has EVERYTHING to do with improving the quality of life.

    Problem is... How do you quantify something as immaterial as "quality of life"?
    And remember, you must take in account that different people value different things differently.
    And before you ask "Why should you quantify it at all? Isn't all life sacred and precious?" - take a million dollars and threat 100 people with that money. For a year.
    But you have to give each one of them the same quality of life, regardless of the fact that they will be chosen completely randomly, just as their age, living conditions and illnesses will be completely random.
    And you don't get to know in advance who's the next person coming through the door, or what is their illness, but all of them ARE life-threatening.

    Oh and, since you love hyperbole so much - all the people you don't get to help will be considered murders.
    Done by you. Personally.
    As if you've taken an axe to each and everyone of them.
    You sick fuck.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  36. This. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No text needed.