Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
Because people die...it can not be prevented, its bound to happen. People with the best health care in the world die every day. People who take care of themselves, eat right, exercise and live a healthy lifestyle and have plenty of health care die ALL THE TIME.
[0 points]2 years ago by jondoughReplyEdited 2 years ago by jondough
If you don't think my questions or comments are relevant then why do you even respond to them??
Why don't you pull your head out of dauguys a$$ and try some critical thinking of your own. I mean seriously, your head is so far up her butt that you know what shes having for breakfast as soon as she opens her mouth to take a bite. I would imagine shes tired of you riding her coat tails and barking like a little Chihuahua every time someone disagrees with her. Geesh...its got to get embarrassing for one of you sooner or later.
So, according to dauguy (and I have no real reason to doubt her number below) 45,000 people died from lack of health care per year.
2,420,000 Americans die per year. Subtract the 45,000 that didn't have adequate care and that gives you 2,375,000 people that apparently did have adequate health care that died anyway. 90,000 of those died in a hospital because of medical errors. So shockingly enough MORE people died from the health care they got than from the health care they didn't get. Very interesting if you ask me.
No, but you could conclude that some of the 45,000 would have died in the hospital. And you could conclude that being able to afford health care might not have saved them anyway.
Of the 45,000...how many were smokers, alcoholics or drug addicts who would have cost the state an untold amount of money to keep them alive when they chose to spend their money on things they knew would kill them?
In the end we all die, the question is should we collectively try to prevent preventable deaths when the person dying can't afford to pay for the cure. Each and every nation needs to answer that for themselves.
No...I have not canceled my health insurance. I can afford health insurance and should I become sick I will spend every dime I have trying to stay alive as long as possible, but I wont be spending YOUR money to keep myself alive while spending my money on new cars, cloths, cigarettes, drugs and alcohol.
I don't care if you do. I am diminished when one of my fellows dies because of my refusal to raise a hand' and so are you. The difference is, you are just fine with it.
THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH JOBS IN THE COUNTRY FOR EVERYONE WHO WORKS TO HAVE A JOB THAT ALLOWS THEM TO AFFORD HEALTH CARE. So if you want to see people die because you deny them health care, and then deny them the ability to buy it--how do you differ from a mass murderer? Except in your own mind, of course.
[2 points]2 years ago by dauguyReplyEdited 2 years ago by dauguy
Wouldn't mind so much if they did, it would put many of them on Social Security and I bet a lot would become liberals/progressives over night.
I spoke to my blind friend last week, and Social Security has at last dropped his bi-annual visit to prove his eyeball hasn't grown back (lost it to a the handle of a bench vise puncturing it when he was four), and the retina hasn't re-attached in the remaining one (retinitis pigmentosa, detached retina, AND a cataract). A good thing, too, because his Social Security check doesn't allow him to both pay rent AND eat in America, nor does it cover biannual trips back to the US to prove this stupid BS. He lives in Thailand, where he can afford a small place, food, and a little help sometimes, and lives in fear of the exchange rate eating a fifth or a quarter of his income overnight. Of course, he has always been a liberal, and so didn't need this experience to convert him.
Actually that doesn't tell the whole story--45,000 died without adequate health care, but how many didn't die that had inadequate health care and compare to how many didn't die that did have adequate health care. I think that % would be the real story??
Once you get to google scholar you can run your own searches. The advantage of using such sources, rather than just google, is that a) you can see the original documents and determine if they were fairly represented, and b) see the statistical methods used, and C) fins out the other parameters of the study.
The disadvantages are that if you want this information, you will likely have to pay for it.Because we don't need good information to base our decisions on. Long live capitalism! :-(
First off, that is not true. Only certain kinds of hospitals are required to treat anyone. Many private hospitals refuse patients that need treatment and die on the way to the county mill.
But that is not primarily how lack of health care kills. It kills because you can't afford high blood pressure meds and stroke out. It kills because you can't afford pre-natal care and your baby dies of 'failure to thrive.' It kills because you sew up the leg you just cut with a chainsaw rather than get dunned for thousands and lose all your pay to garnishments all by yourself, which makes it weaker, dumping you out of a tree to your death. It kills because enough anti-vaccination rich mothers left their kids unvaccinated, so your kid--who didn't get vaccinated because you couldn't afford it--dies of the local whooping cough epidemic. It kills by leaving you with amputations because your diabetes in improperly controlled, and multiple amputees die sooner. It kills because you need home care, but have no insurance for it, so you are put in a home with a death rate that would put Iraq to shame.
BS. all hospitals are required to treat you. You think it's bad now wait until the Obama care gets passed. Your old enough that you will not get any care because you are past your prime and are not contributing enough to society. As for the rest of your comment' your insane!!
I don't know any exact figures on this, but I expect them to be high for many of the reasons given by dauguy in the examples above. But of course any unnecessary death for lack of health care in a rich country like the USA is one too many and a shame for that nation.
It's about 45,000 per year. Which is comparable to the death rate from automobiles.
It is chilling to realize that simple lack of medical care kills ten times what 9/11 did--ANNUALLY--yet the same people who yelp for unlimited spending to kill a half million Iraqis won't spend a cent to save their fellow citizens.
We already know that most Americans support massive health care reform, and that that number dropped only a little in the face of MASSIVE spending by the health care industry to change their minds. And we know that most people, if asked if they support a war for economic reasons, are opposed. It has taken longer for the massive efforts of the media to propagandize that war in support of the military-industrial complex to be counteracted.
The only privately covered people who ignore that stat are those that essentially hate their fellow human beings. And they are, even here, still a minority.
In nature, the Great Pyrenees is confident, gentle, and affectionate. While territorial and protective of flock or family when necessary, the general demeanor is one of quiet composure, both patient and tolerant. The Great Pyrenees is strong willed, independent and somewhat reserved, yet attentive, fearless and loyal to flock and family.
How many Americans had plenty of health care and still died?
This comment was deleted.
[3 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyBecause people die...it can not be prevented, its bound to happen. People with the best health care in the world die every day. People who take care of themselves, eat right, exercise and live a healthy lifestyle and have plenty of health care die ALL THE TIME.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyWho elected you question moderator?
If you don't think my questions or comments are relevant then why do you even respond to them??
Why don't you pull your head out of dauguys a$$ and try some critical thinking of your own. I mean seriously, your head is so far up her butt that you know what shes having for breakfast as soon as she opens her mouth to take a bite. I would imagine shes tired of you riding her coat tails and barking like a little Chihuahua every time someone disagrees with her. Geesh...its got to get embarrassing for one of you sooner or later.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyYour embarrassing yourself again!
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyIt IS like shooting fish in a barrel, isn't it?
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyTch, tch--devolving to ad hominem attacks again I see. Every time you actually act sane for a few posts, you go and do this again.
But I must say, it is a good thing you do. It makes it clear what kind of person holds your kind of 'ethics.'
Pot calling the kettle black!
This comment was deleted by dauguy .
[1 point] 2 years ago byThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Lecture/The-Top-Ten-Things-People-Believe-About-Canadian-Health-Care-But-Shouldnt
I think that is a good question after first finding out the ratio of how many did to how many didn't..
So, according to dauguy (and I have no real reason to doubt her number below) 45,000 people died from lack of health care per year.
2,420,000 Americans die per year. Subtract the 45,000 that didn't have adequate care and that gives you 2,375,000 people that apparently did have adequate health care that died anyway. 90,000 of those died in a hospital because of medical errors. So shockingly enough MORE people died from the health care they got than from the health care they didn't get. Very interesting if you ask me.
Those people died because they could not afford health care and would have lived (a little longer) otherwise.
If we take your numbers we could shockingly conclude that it would be better to close all hospitals :P
No, but you could conclude that some of the 45,000 would have died in the hospital. And you could conclude that being able to afford health care might not have saved them anyway.
Of the 45,000...how many were smokers, alcoholics or drug addicts who would have cost the state an untold amount of money to keep them alive when they chose to spend their money on things they knew would kill them?
In the end we all die, the question is should we collectively try to prevent preventable deaths when the person dying can't afford to pay for the cure. Each and every nation needs to answer that for themselves.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Lecture/The-Top-Ten-Things-People-Believe-About-Canadian-Health-Care-But-Shouldnt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems
So have you canceled your health insurance? NO? Why not? Since you will assuredly die anyway.
No...I have not canceled my health insurance. I can afford health insurance and should I become sick I will spend every dime I have trying to stay alive as long as possible, but I wont be spending YOUR money to keep myself alive while spending my money on new cars, cloths, cigarettes, drugs and alcohol.
I don't care if you do. I am diminished when one of my fellows dies because of my refusal to raise a hand' and so are you. The difference is, you are just fine with it.
THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH JOBS IN THE COUNTRY FOR EVERYONE WHO WORKS TO HAVE A JOB THAT ALLOWS THEM TO AFFORD HEALTH CARE. So if you want to see people die because you deny them health care, and then deny them the ability to buy it--how do you differ from a mass murderer? Except in your own mind, of course.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyWouldn't mind so much if they did, it would put many of them on Social Security and I bet a lot would become liberals/progressives over night.
I spoke to my blind friend last week, and Social Security has at last dropped his bi-annual visit to prove his eyeball hasn't grown back (lost it to a the handle of a bench vise puncturing it when he was four), and the retina hasn't re-attached in the remaining one (retinitis pigmentosa, detached retina, AND a cataract). A good thing, too, because his Social Security check doesn't allow him to both pay rent AND eat in America, nor does it cover biannual trips back to the US to prove this stupid BS. He lives in Thailand, where he can afford a small place, food, and a little help sometimes, and lives in fear of the exchange rate eating a fifth or a quarter of his income overnight. Of course, he has always been a liberal, and so didn't need this experience to convert him.
So, just because some number would not have been saved, then none of them should have health care? Giving yours up tomorrow, I bet--Not!
Actually that doesn't tell the whole story--45,000 died without adequate health care, but how many didn't die that had inadequate health care and compare to how many didn't die that did have adequate health care. I think that % would be the real story??
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyYou work on that for us dog..
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyNow you are cooking!!
If you would like to do some reading about how lack of health care impacts people like your wife:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/259/19/2872
http://nejm.highwire.org/cgi/content/abstract/345/15/1106
And on children:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=lack+of+health+care+children&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=40000000000001&as_sdtp=on
and on adults:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=lack+of+health+care+adults&btnG=Search&as_sdt=40000000000000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0
Once you get to google scholar you can run your own searches. The advantage of using such sources, rather than just google, is that a) you can see the original documents and determine if they were fairly represented, and b) see the statistical methods used, and C) fins out the other parameters of the study.
The disadvantages are that if you want this information, you will likely have to pay for it.Because we don't need good information to base our decisions on. Long live capitalism! :-(
Fewer than would have died without it.
None. Any American can go to the hospital when they are sick and get treated.
First off, that is not true. Only certain kinds of hospitals are required to treat anyone. Many private hospitals refuse patients that need treatment and die on the way to the county mill.
But that is not primarily how lack of health care kills. It kills because you can't afford high blood pressure meds and stroke out. It kills because you can't afford pre-natal care and your baby dies of 'failure to thrive.' It kills because you sew up the leg you just cut with a chainsaw rather than get dunned for thousands and lose all your pay to garnishments all by yourself, which makes it weaker, dumping you out of a tree to your death. It kills because enough anti-vaccination rich mothers left their kids unvaccinated, so your kid--who didn't get vaccinated because you couldn't afford it--dies of the local whooping cough epidemic. It kills by leaving you with amputations because your diabetes in improperly controlled, and multiple amputees die sooner. It kills because you need home care, but have no insurance for it, so you are put in a home with a death rate that would put Iraq to shame.
And so on.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyBS. all hospitals are required to treat you. You think it's bad now wait until the Obama care gets passed. Your old enough that you will not get any care because you are past your prime and are not contributing enough to society. As for the rest of your comment' your insane!!
I personally know the guy who sewed up his leg after slicing it with a chainsaw.
On average-last week??? They did or didn't last week...
Figures are not completed on a weekly basis. Take the annual rate--which is calculated--and divide by 52. On average.
I don't know any exact figures on this, but I expect them to be high for many of the reasons given by dauguy in the examples above. But of course any unnecessary death for lack of health care in a rich country like the USA is one too many and a shame for that nation.
It's about 45,000 per year. Which is comparable to the death rate from automobiles.
It is chilling to realize that simple lack of medical care kills ten times what 9/11 did--ANNUALLY--yet the same people who yelp for unlimited spending to kill a half million Iraqis won't spend a cent to save their fellow citizens.
Wow- this is amazing but no doubt a stat ignored by most privately covered people.
We already know that most Americans support massive health care reform, and that that number dropped only a little in the face of MASSIVE spending by the health care industry to change their minds. And we know that most people, if asked if they support a war for economic reasons, are opposed. It has taken longer for the massive efforts of the media to propagandize that war in support of the military-industrial complex to be counteracted.
The only privately covered people who ignore that stat are those that essentially hate their fellow human beings. And they are, even here, still a minority.
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Lecture/The-Top-Ten-Things-People-Believe-About-Canadian-Health-Care-But-Shouldnt