It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.K. Cancer Death Rate is 38% higher than in the US

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   

U.K. Cancer Death Rate is 38% higher than in the US


biggovernment.com

In 2008, Britain had a cancer death rate 0.25% while the United States had a rate of only 0.18%. The UK cancer death rate was 38% higher than in the United States.

The Guardian, the UK’s left wing daily, estimated that “up to 10,000 people” are dying each year of cancer “because their condition is diagnosed too late, according to research by the government’s director of cancer services.” While many people die because of late detection due to their own negligence, there is no reason to believe this self-neglect is more common in the UK than in the US.

In Canada, the cancer d
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Is it not about time to simply look at the quantitative data to understand the issues with respect to health care? We all know that Americans have a very unhealthy lifestyle. Too much red meat, smoking, booze, fat, you name it. Despite all of those factors we have a system in place that is by far the best in the world.

How about we focus on the aspects of preventative care and other aspects of the system that will actually do things to KEEP people healthy rather than impose a massive system to socialize a major portion of the economy which will do nothing other than make the current system less efficient and do nothing to keep people healthy.

For all of the folks who are pushing socialized medicine. Explain to me why this solution will not work. Give every citizen $1,000,000 to be held in an interest bearing account that can only be used to cover health care costs. Any amount over the $1,000,000 by virtue of interest can be used by the government to cover things like medical school scholarships, building and staffing of clinics, etc. My estimate is that costs about $350,000,000. Illegals get simple treatment in two phases. Emergency care and immediate deportation, no questions, no exceptions. Should they have a family here, even should their children be US citizens, they go. They can take their family with them or not, but they go.

Tell me why that won't work.

biggovernment.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


Wait, don't all UK citizens get "free" health care and therefore can visit their doctor if they so much as sneeze? Apparently I don't understand their system as much as I thought.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Yes we do have free health care.

I think the problem is that in the UK we tend to go to the doctor when its to much to live with not when the first signs show.

In my opinion its not a difference in health care or cost its a cultural one



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by truthquest
 


Yes. Should they have a cold they can see a doctor at once. If they have cancer they can see one next year. If they want a preventative exam like a mamogram or colon screening they get that right away too. Right after they find the cancer, they check to see if they are going to get cancer. Fantastic



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by jpmail
 
We need the percentage of people who are caught with cancer in England versus the percentage of people caught with cancer in our country. Americans avoid trips to the doctor whenever we can. The deaths could be the result of English cancer treatments being more deadly than American cancer treatments. Many of us fear that the government will use healthcare as opportunity to cull the herd.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jpmail
Yes we do have free health care.

I think the problem is that in the UK we tend to go to the doctor when its to much to live with not when the first signs show.

In my opinion its not a difference in health care or cost its a cultural one


I was living with a brain tumor growing in my head for 4 years before I was diagnosed. the symptoms got so bad i was rushed to hospial after collapsing. I didn't want to come to terms with what was going on. The tumor had grown so large it had squased my brain in to one half of my head and was the size of an orange when they removed it. amazing how long i hid the symptoms knowing all along something was seriously wrong. I was 23 when i was finnaly diagnosed.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by woodwardjnr]

[edit on 2-12-2009 by woodwardjnr]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I suppose another factor is timescale, I need physiotherpy for my back NHS appiontment has not come through after 3 months so far.

Went private after my work offered to pay got seen inside a few days.

Free health care might sound great but it has its limitations.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
Despite all of those factors we have a system in place that is by far the best in the world.


Yup. If you happen to be rich enough to afford it, that is. The fact is, most people are not, and for-profit medical care is a barbaric way of doing things that just shouldn't have a place in any civilised country any more.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


giving 1 million dollars to everyone in america would only cost 350 million dollars?!
something doesn't seem to pan out here.......
i believe the actual number would be somewhere around $350,000,000,000,000 (350 trillion)



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by djon01
 


There are roughly 310 million Americans. Giving each of us a $1M = $310M



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


That's not quite the correct math. Giving one dollar to every American would equal $310 million.

Multiply 1,000,000 x 310,000,000 and you will get 310,000,000,000,000 or 310 trillion.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 02:51 AM
link   
The simple fact is most people in the uk dont go and see their doctors regulary. I only go and see the doctor when I am ill and for most part these doctors have about a zillion patients on their list and cannot have the luxury of having a 30mins chat asking about other issues. The NHS isnt failing the people who make up the NHS are very profeesional people what is failing our NHS is the greed of the pharmaceutical companies where the best medicine is too expensive to buy, Too much red tape and a failing capitialist system that can no longer afford to keep it running.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 05:20 AM
link   
Part of the problem IS the easy access I think. The surgery is full of the worried well while the people who are truly unwell tend to hold back.
I certainly can't fault my local practice. But fortunately I have not needed specialist treatment. Did you hear about the pensioner who needed a heart op but felt he might be dead by the time his 'slot' was due? He went ahead and paid for a private op (same consultants!) and they only found out about his bouncing cheque when the op was done. As he said - he had paid into the system all his life and didn't see why 'health tourists' should get in front of him in the queue.
And that's another problem. It seems we are still giving away our health care.
news.bbc.co.uk...


[edit on 3-12-2009 by unicorn1]



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
For the most part the UK's NHS is made up of disgruntled staff. Well, the one's on the front-line like dr's, nurses, midwives etc are. I've worked in the nhs and have friends who have been there for years - it's like fighting a battle just to give the right care to patients.

Most of the policies etc are made from people who have never done any 'caring' for patients and crunch numbers, waiting times etc. The pressure they place on the staff is overwhelming.

After the amount of mistakes/misdiagnosis totals came out a few years ago my friend turned to me and said "Why do you think it's called a doctors practise?" I have to admit that I'd never thought of it that way before



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
As someone has already pointed out, the figures could be because of a difference in the type of Cancers that are reported. Some would/could be more prevalent in the UK than the US. Another consideration to take in, is how the figures are reported ...... statistics can easily be manipulated and the UK and the US may use different methods of recording statistics. It may not be all black and white.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
At the risk of sounding biased, or maybe bitter, I think the higher death rate might also be because once you're diagnosed in the UK you're almost certainly a gonner. Some doctors are very good but most are too busy or too lazy to look into our ailments. It's called "hit and miss diagnosis" and it's very common. Those hits and misses continue far into the cancer treatments too.

Then there's the "cut, burn and poison" methods that are used.

Everyone I've known who has had cancer died from it. They didn't get better. From the second they were diagnosed they spiralled down to an extremely painful death while doped up on morphine. They were ALL given radiation therapy, then an operation, then chemotherapy. What sticks with me is that when each one of these people were given their chemo they were each told "you're lucky to get this" because it's "special" and "brand new". Maybe they were informed in this way so they could switch to positive attitude mode? I just know that the third or fourth time I heard the same story it made me feel sick.



[edit on 5-12-2009 by wigit]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Morphine 'might spread cancer'

ps

If this BBC story is true then how come it's taken so long to find this out?



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   
The NHS is ridiculous... I dont know about everywhere else but where I live you're waiting a good 3/4 weeks just to get an appointment. And if you actually need any tests then your going to be waiting 3+ months for them to get sorted.

For instance, a few months ago I had insanely high blood pressure, and the doctor wanted me to have an overnight stay in hospital to see what was going on. 4 months on and I'm still waiting for it be sorted out! I could keel over and die at any moment


It is free (well no its not actually, especially if you need anything doing to your teeth... if you can even get registered with a dentist within a 100 mile radius of where you live), so I suppose we've got to expect its not going to run perfectly. But I can completely understand why people leave it until the last possible moment before getting themselves seen to.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by truthquest
 


Yes. Should they have a cold they can see a doctor at once. If they have cancer they can see one next year. If they want a preventative exam like a mamogram or colon screening they get that right away too. Right after they find the cancer, they check to see if they are going to get cancer. Fantastic


Sorry mate, that's utter bollocks. Every person with suspected cancer see's a specialist within 2 weeks, not a year. Screening for cancers is routine and anyone in an "at risk" group is called in for screening regulary. Should potential cancer be seen, a specialist they will be sent to.

As for these "death rates", I am going to check the figures. The Guardian is a left-wing rag of a paper and has probably done some "doctoring"...




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join