March 30, 2009

"Did Socialized Medicine Kill Natasha Richardson?"

Uh, probably, but since emergency helicopters sometimes crash, it all pretty much evens out, kind of.

88 comments:

New York said...

What a bizarre argument.

Someone should tell Slate that it's not required to beclown yourself to defend the current administration's policies from every single criticism.

Peter V. Bella said...

What next? Who killed Roger Rabbit? Toons, the media and the government are run by toons.

Saul said...

I don't know all the facts surrounding the accident, but I think there is the component that she didn't experience that big of a fall, and it was sort of a freak accident that she didn't fully understand, coupled possibly with the fact that she is a semi-celebrity and didn't want a bunch of attention.

The same day of the accident, my son tripped and smacked his head on the sidewalk. I took him to the hospital immediately, because I'm paranoid about head injuries. At the hospital, I had two choices, do nothing or have a CT scan. Because of his young age, I chose not to do the CT because it involves a ton of radiation.

Thankfully, he was ok. He is two and a half. Older people are more susceptible to extreme injuries, because the brain shrinks.

Until the case is fully investigated, it is impossible to say who is to blame, if anyone.

Meade said...

Two tree wrongs do not make a forest right.

carly said...

Socialized medicine didn't kill Natasha Richardson because it was she who first refused treatment for an injury in which timely treatment is essential. But socialized medicine DID kill ALEX Richardson, a 21 year old student at St. Andrews University in Scotland, who sustained a similar injury when he fell through a roof skylight onto his head. Alex was rushed to hospital in Dundee where CT scan/surgery could easily have saved him.

But in UK socialist medicine bean counters don't authorize CT scans unless the patient has a skull fracture or is unconscious. So Alex was sent home, told to rest and come back if he got worse (ie. lost consciousness). He did lose consciousness--permanently; he died several hours later, alone in his room.

Police said they didn't suspect foul play in Alex's accident. The foul play took place at the hospital where government health policy effectively murdered Alex Richardson.

Issob Morocco said...

Eve really thinks emergency copters are 'profit centers'? And she bases her argument on one anecdotal story that provides no more detail than "originally non life threatening injuries (did those injuries change like Natasha's?).

Basis her thinking, I guess I could say we don't need Slate as it is a profit center and her story is so weak that whatever good stories Mickey Kaus has, matters not, put reporting in the government's control.

Oh wait, it is already.

MadisonMan said...

Saul, I recall that at about 6 months, we did have our daughter's skull x-rayed for some reason. I don't even remember why anymore. What I do remember is the x-ray showed her screaming, and it's an image that always makes me laugh, so thanks for reminding me of that.

Bissage said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bissage said...

1) It is inaccurate to say there are no medevac choppers in Canada. The problem is there are always dozens of Indian men clinging all over them.

(2) Two wrongs don't make a right but three rights make a left.

Lem said...

I was never sold on "stabilizing" Lady Diana in the back of the van either.

But of course what do we know?

Henry said...

What Women Really Think?

Oy.

Pogo said...

Since the superiority of socialized health care is a religious belief, rather than a set of facts, the idea that socialized medicine could be responsible for any adverse outcome is at once ludicrous and heretical.

"Did Socialized Medicine Kill Natasha Richardson?"
It was Marx's will. Be thankful and praise him.

downtownlad said...

From what I've read - she would have had to seek medical treatment in the first two minutes, as she probably had internal bleeding. Since she didn't want treatment, she was pretty much doomed no matter where she was.

But in the US, even though she would have been dead, at least her family could have sued for a couple of million dollars malpractice.

traditionalguy said...

The Free medical care system's approach to medical care says why do something you can get out of doing. You can't see a subdural hematoma, so who could know for sure that free helicpter rides to get free CT scans are ever needed or not? On the other hand, when the system is paid a profit for its services, then you can't see a reason not to be safe and sell victims the services. Just remember that the PIGS will still arrange to get themselves those precautionary services, just not you, you miserable freeloaders. The Great Deception is that the benefits of our Profit system will become Free, once the Congress makes it so.

Meade said...

Bissage wisecracked...
"(2) Two wrongs don't make a right but three rights make a left."

So very true. Still, a lot of good that will do you when you've focused so much on the idealized forest of national health care that you run right smack into the metaphorical tree you yourself planted in the middle of the road!

Eve: Caution! Hard hat area!

AJ Lynch said...

I suspect Eve's pre-emptive defense of nationalized healthcare arose from a paranoia she contracted virally from Journolist.

Peter V. Bella said...

If this had happened here, the all trees on the slopes would be cut down to protect errant and careless skiers from the dangers of trees.

A law would be passed banning trees within miles of a ski slope. The National Tree Association would be villified and demonized as tree nuts.

A movement would be established to ban the planting and raising of trees. All trees would have to be registered. Felons and the mentally ill could not own trees.

Phony statistics woud be used to show how many people are killed by trees, how many deaths and injuries could be prevented if forests were clear cut, and the dangers of trees to "the children".

Tree huggers would be laughed at and their ridiculous and specious arguments would be fodder for the late night comedy shows. Of course since they all look like bark chewers and backwoods pecker heads the aughs would be real.

Soon our world would be a much better and peaceful place without trees.

downtownlad said...

I don't think she hit a tree. It was a bunny slope. But she wasn't wearing a helmet.

madawaskan said...

Having seen the Canadian health care inaction and the military health care system....
Well I just can't wait for the rest of you to join up!

Really though I'm not that vindictive. I'd rather join you guys but there it is.

Quebec hospitals even if she had made it are notorious for infection-ones that people acquire once there.

Lots of rich Canadians go to America for their health care-especially if they don't like the wait time.

But really we can't destroy their bubble-the myth of Canada.


The "Liberalterian" that the CATO Institute is paying is particularly good for laughs.

Bhtv had him up against Jonah Goldberg and his basic working theory was that Canada was superior to America because a survey found that their people reported being "happier".

He concluded because criminals in Canada don't get shot by their thuggish police and that somehow Canada's governing style led to a lower crime rate.

Ghee class can we think of at least another dozen reasons why Canada might have a lower crime rate?

Do you have to have lived in Canada to see some of the obvious reasons?

save_the_rustbelt said...

Anecdotes do not evidence make.

However....

These days a CT scan is a very basic piece of E.D. equipment, at least here in the states. Accurate diagnosis of neuro trauma should be a given in a first world country. Apparently not.

Henry said...

DTL wrote: But in the US, even though she would have been dead, at least her family could have sued for a couple of million dollars malpractice.

There was a local TV ad running during the NCAA games last week. Lawyer. First spot has a woman who was misdiagnosed as having cancer when she didn't. He made the bastards pay. Second spot has a woman who wasn't diagnosed when she did have cancer. He made those bastards pay too.

A nicely circular set of incentives for more malpractice suits, yes?

Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) said...

Reasons why Canada might have a lower crime rate:

a) in winter it's much too cold
b) in summer it's light almost all day long

MadisonMan said...

downtownlad, don't get in the way of Peter's narrative.

Issob Morocco said...

Socialized Medicine=100% of nothing.

Lem said...

Natasha was Broadway royalty.
I believe it’s the duty of every Broadway actor to go to war with Canada.

Don’t worry, there is nothing neoconish about it.

madawaskan said...

Bart Hall-

Well even in the US most crime happens in the big cities-which Canada doesn't have quite as many of. Like it or not population density is a factor.

In most parts of Canada you have to drive ten miles to rob Pete of his potatoes and then the get away is pretty hard because you have to drive over black ice and dodge caribou...

Oh and this same Liberaltarian said that Canada was a lot "free-er" Whatever.

Let's see when I was in Canada I was deemed not French enough to play on the basketball team,-I didn't fit the requirement of being 80% French.

Whatever, don't ask me why that was the magic percentage but I think it was based on the general population of the town-majority French.

Anyoo...us tete carees-English types were told to go be cheerleaders-which we did.

About two months into that they told us that 80% of our cheers had to be in French.

Speaking of which they had some weird formula for the radio and Canadian disc jockeys had to play a majority of the rock stars from the Common Wealth.

Thank God for the English because even if Rush and Triumph are pretty good you can only take so much Ann Murray and Bachman Turner Overdrive.


Oh Canada!

Peter V. Bella said...

It was a bunny slope.

Next we kill all the bunnies!!!!!!

former law student said...

Do medevac helicopters really come out of Canada's national health care budget? Who pays for them here in the U.S.? We still don't have national health care as far as I know.

Although even in the U.S., not every hospital is a trauma center, hospitals serving similar ski areas all have CT scanners.

Here, such equipment is partially funded through voluntary donations -- I wonder how that works in Canada. Do they have pancake breakfasts and silent auctions to help pay for CT scanners?

Irene said...

New Zealand!

PatCA said...

The main difference between totally socialized medicine and fee-for-service medicine is the way each rations care. In the US we ration care by providing it to those who pay for it. In Canada, it's age or whatever criteria the government chooses. If you think socialized medicine will give you a knee replacement or a bypass at 70, think again. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1070272

We have to choose which one we want; there is no free lunch.

Cedarford said...

Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) said...
Reasons why Canada might have a lower crime rate:

a) in winter it's much too cold
b) in summer it's light almost all day long


Real reason - blacks commit violent crime at 10X the rate of whites or Asians. Canada has far less blacks as a percentage of population than the USA does. But in states on the US where blacks are at or below Canada's percentages, violent crime is at or below Canadian rates.
_____________________
madawaskan said...
Bart Hall-

Well even in the US most crime happens in the big cities-which Canada doesn't have quite as many of. Like it or not population density is a factor.


Incorrect. Excepting Quebec (just barely), the majority of Canadians live in or near large cities. 80% of Canadians live within 30 miles of the US Border. And if you look at population densities, the majority of Canadians live in population density areas that exceed the density per square mile that most Americans live in..

But then again, describing crime as a function of "large urban areas" in America is basically just a euphemism that Americans have been taught to use as a substitute for "places lots of scary underclass blacks live" - to avoid accusations of "racism!!"
___________________

As for Richardson, she fell at low speed onto soft snow - and wearing a helmet or being in the US would likely have made no difference. Brain bleeds happen when a vessel just is weak and lets go. Sometimes precipitated by trauma, sometimes not (like with FDR, while just sitting in a chair). And in trauma not involving a fracture, the bleed is started mainly by G-forces shifting the brain back and forth independent of wearing a helmet.

The death rates for cerebral hemorrhages in the US are similar to Canada's. Just like cancer or heart conditions. But the Canadians, like the European and advanced Asian nations, tend to live longer than Americans, in part because they do not have 1/6th of working people outside the healthcare insurance system.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

But in the US, even though she would have been dead, at least her family could have sued for a couple of million dollars malpractice

And THIS is why our medical costs and the costs of insurance are so high.

fcai said...

Don't be dissin' John Edwards and his ilk - them law talkin' dudes will sue you!

Irene said...

Most Canadians I know are not happy with their system. If they can afford it, they seek health care in this country.

Peter V. Bella said...

Real reason - blacks commit violent crime at 10X the rate of whites or Asians.

Blacks commit 10X the rate… in areas where there are large numbers of impoverished Blacks. The same holds true for Hispanics and European Americans. Large, densely populated impoverished areas drive crime rates up.

There, all fixed.

Peter V. Bella said...

DBQ you hit the nail on the head. One of the reasons for our mess is the legal system- unfettered and unchecked.

Of course the judicial system is also to blame for approving these high judgements and settlements.

Then there is the malpractice insurance industry that gives the money away and just charges higher and higher rates.

Daryl said...

I suspect Eve's pre-emptive defense of nationalized healthcare arose from a paranoia she contracted virally from Journolist.

JournoList might be being used to float potential responses to stories that are bad for liberals. If so, it won't pick up on this story, because it's a complete failure.

madawaskan said...

Allo?

Cedarford-you're an expert on Canada now-ay?

Look it's a shame I'd like to respond to you but my general policy is that after spending years and I do mean years on several blogs trying to get around your anti-semitism-I skip you.

Look I'm pretty sure somewhere in your post you've blamed Jews for something-then I'm going to get P.O.'d.

I see Peter has taken care of you.

After reading Peter's comment I'd just like to add that America provides an escape route of sorts for those that Canada can't employ.

Every Canadian I've known eventually tries to hit me up for help with their Green Cards-to guess where?

America, they know that after my dad retired he worked for immigration.

Also warmer environments will attract those with not much to lose, the homeless are more numerable in warmer environs.

So Canada has a lot of built in advantages not to mention that they are pretty homogeneous by comparison to America.

I mean once and a while a clan of Scots will get into a knife fight with a clan of Irish over whose got the better plaid-it's hell I tell ya.

TMink said...

Race is not the best predictor of incarceration, other factors are. Things like the age of the mom when she had the child, the marital status of the mom, and whether the mom dropped out of high school. When these factors are considered, race drops out completely.

In other words, choices doom children, not race or poverty. Sadly, there are cultures where it is aceptable and normal for women and girls under 25 to have children outside a supportive marriage. In those cultures, the women tend to have children with different men that do not marry and love the mom. White and Hispanic homes that engage in the risky behaviors of trying to raise children outside a happy marriage have the same results.

At least that is what the data shows.

Trey

madawaskan said...

Although I really am not sure because I no longer wish to be responsible for reading and responding to your comments so I really don't know what the discussion is.

90% chance it's the Jews though or will become that somehow..

Really a shame because you aren't stupid but perhaps in the street smart sense you are.

Jeremy said...

Didn't she turn the ambulance away and return to her hotel room?

"Yves Coderre, director of operations at a local ambulance company, told the Globe and Mail that paramedics arrived at the mountain 17 minutes after receiving a 911 call, but Richardson sent them away." (CBS News - Thursday, March 19, 2009)

AJ Lynch said...

Trey:

As you know, some commenters are not really interested in data. Heh.

Joe said...

It's not just malpractice insurance and defensive medicine driving up costs, but the increased use of very expensive procedures with very marginal benefit. The use of Medevac helicopters for non-life threatening emergencies being one case in point. Mammograms being another (turns out they're almost completely useless with some evidence that they cause more problems than they solve.) There is a lot of political correctness and defensive medicine in the latter, but it's also due to hospitals buying expensive machines that go "beep" and insisting on using them.

(We had my last daughter at home. Cost us $500 for the midwife. We did this because child #3 was delivered by the nurse and child #2 could have been. I'm not advocating home birth--a woman should deliver where she feels comfortable and safe--but child birth is absurdly expensive.)

Freder Frederson said...

Real reason - blacks commit violent crime at 10X the rate of whites or Asians.

So Cedarford, do you have a theory why blacks commit more crimes--or is that self-evident.

I tore my ACL skiing at Whistler in Canada. From the ski patrol to the ER care, I received excellent care, certainly comparable to what I would have in the States. And my total bill was 400 CDN (U.S. $300 at the time). That was ten years ago. Nine months later I had a bicycle accident in Washington D.C. that required stitches. They also did a CT scan (which I doubt they would have done if I was uninsured). The bill for that ER visit was $3000.

Of course Natasha Richardson would have been able to afford care no matter where she was in the world. But if you have inadequate insurance or none at all, I would much rather risk my health and wallet to the Canadian system rather than the American one.

mcg said...

The more I have read about this, the more little snippets of information have come out, the more I am convinced that this was not quite the freak unpredictable tragedy it has been made out to be.

People fall down during skiing all the time; heaven knows I've had my share of garage sales (one ski here, one ski there, one pole here, one pole there, etc.) But not every fall prompts the instructor to escort the victim personally back to the lodge. Not every fall prompts a call to 911. I am inclined to think, now, that there were indeed signs that this was not a normal fall, that those with experience seemed to know that intuitively, but that intuition was ignored.

I don't want to be too harsh about it though, because look even if the signs *were* ignored, the worst that *usually* happens is that someone is walking around with a concussion that is rarely if ever fatal. I'm just saying that this was not your garden variety spill.

Jeremy said...

traditionalguy said..."The Free medical care system's approach to medical care says why do something you can get out of doing."

And you base this on what?

(Just for fun, walk into a hospital today, tell them you have absolutely no insurance, and see what happens.)

I spent years traveling throughout the world on business, had many conversations regarding national (socialized) health care, and never heard a disparaging word.

Here in America I have similar conversations and hear all kinds of horrible stories about poor medical care, massive bills from hospitals, doctors and the ridiculous cost of drugs.

Oh, and the cost of the insurance itself is also a topic that gets people pretty riled up. Before we moved into our group coverage from an employer, my wife and I paid $10,000 a year for full coverage (no pre-existing conditions, and both in excellent health), and that was with a $2,500 deductible.

Right now we're all paying for those who can't afford insurance, one way or another.

mcg said...

I tore my ACL skiing at Whistler in Canada. From the ski patrol to the ER care, I received excellent care, certainly comparable to what I would have in the States.

Freder, I am not interested in getting into a health care debate here, so I won't. But I want to highlight something you've said here---the excellent care you received from the ski patrol. I had the same experience when I was injured on the slopes (shattered my femur, actually: ouch!) The ski patroller that assisted me was truly incredible. They know what they are doing.

I echo your sentiment here only to reinforce my suspicion that the pros at the ski resort knew something was up with Natasha Richardson. Had their suspicions been heeded, she would likely be alive today.

holdfast said...

I am pretty hard on the Canadian medical system, having grown up there and barely survived its ministrations (ok, kid, but it did come close to killing or severely injuring my mom), but I think that emergency care is pretty good. It is the stuff that can be delayed which will be delayed - hip replacements that take over 2 years, etc.

Freder Frederson said...

Most Canadians I know are not happy with their system. If they can afford it, they seek health care in this country.

Exactly how many Canadians do you know? And do they realize how much medical insurance costs in this country? That losing a job if you have a chronic condition can mean not being able to get insurance at any price. Do they have any clue of the amount of out of pocket expenses that saddle most Americans (copays, deductibles, lifetime caps), even those with excellent insurance, that most people who are covered under "socialized" medicine never have to worry about? Do they know how insurance companies routinely deny claims or refuse to pay for care?

And if they can't afford it? Would they rather live in Canada with its system or here in the states with our "best in the world" system.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

It's not just malpractice insurance and defensive medicine driving up costs, but the increased use of very expensive procedures with very marginal benefit

Yes....and why do you think that Doctors and Hospitals practice over-kill, over the top, excessive and unnecessary procedures? To avoid malpractice suits.

If you, as a Doctor, perform every procedure under the sun and order every conceivable test (like in House the TV series) you will be attempting to cover your butt. Instead of telling the mother of the kid with the scraped knee to put some ointment on it and give the kid a lollipop and go home, we have to do xrays, scans and prescribe expensive ointments, antibiotics and schedule follow up appointments.

Since the insurance company is dinged for all of these unnecessary tests, they raise their rates. Malpractice insurance is sky high and doctors raise their rates accordingly. In addition many doctors and hospitals are subsidizing the non-paying or low paying welfare patients (Medicaid- Medi-cal payers, Illegal Aliens), Medicare and people who pop into the emergency rooms with trivial or non existent illnesses.

I have a Doctor client who calls Medi-cal the California Gold Card. He sees all kinds of fraud, waste and stupidity all the time, when it is his turn in the ER. One woman brought her child in several times with severe diaper rash. All she needed to use was some simple hygiene instead of letting her child sit in a dirty diaper for days while she was doing drugs. After several times of this, he tried to report the woman to child protective services and was turned away because there were no broken bones or bruises.

Nice, isn't it, to see our tax dollars at work.

William said...

Herewith an illuminating comparison between the Moscow subway system and the national health service: The Soviet Union over several years spent more than 25% of the their GDP on the building of the Moscow subway system. They got something for their money. The subway stations had marble floors and chandeliers. Everyone who saw their subway was impressed. The Soviet line was that the subway was the transportation of the proleteriat, and they deserved the best. The subway was the showpiece for the good things the Soviets would bring to the proleteriat. And so it was reported by western observers.....What was not reported was that most residents of the Soviet Union were not members of the Moscow proleteriat. They were, in fact, not even members of the proleteriat. The overwhelming majority of the Soviet citizens were agricultural workers. The Moscow subway system was built on their chronic hunger and underpaid labor. This basic glaring fact was not reported until after the fall of the Soviet Union.....This is illustrative of the tendency to fit certain facts within a certain narrative and to ignore facts that do not fit within that narrative. This is a human tendency and not based on ideology. However, it must be admitted that the most conspicuous practioners of the art of ignoring the obvious are members of the left....After the introduction of a national health system, there will be winners and losers. The winners, the uninsured mother who gets her gall bladder operation, will be celebrated. The losers, the cranky old man who has to wait for a hip replacement, will be ignored or condemned. I don't think the press will give an honest tally of the winners and losers.....Medical care is now rationed according to wealth, ie insurance. Most of us feel kind of uneasy about this. Under the proposed reform of national health, medical care will be rationed by waiting times and influential connections. There are perhaps just as many moral objections to the latter as to the former......My first suggestion would be to ration health care according to the good looks of the recipient, but there are too many subjective factors involved in such a decision. I think the only fair and objective way to ration health care is based on the height of the recipient. This is not to say that there are not many worthy short people deserving of a long life, but we need some objective way of triaging patients that is not based on wealth, influence, or the ability to wait out the line. This is the most equitable one I could think of.

Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) said...

Hey Mad -- that thing about winter was a joke I first heard when living North of 60. I lived for 20 years as an adult in Canada, dont treize au Quebec, so I know the gig.

You may be aware that the magnitude of anti-Semitism in Quebec exceeds whatever Cedar might muster, by many orders of magnitude. I gave up on Canada almost 20 years ago, due to a lousy expensive health care system, oppressive bureaucracy, confiscatory income tax, a 16% GST (grab & steal tax) on what I got to keep, etc. etc.

That said, Richardson's problem had absolutely nothing to do with any of that. She may well have had a small cerebral aneurysm that would have blown on its own in a few years. Guys have way worse bangs on the head from rodeo, football, or a really good cross-check ... and every so often one of 'em dies.

madawaskan said...

Bart-

OMG! You did NOT mention the Canadian tax rates!

You sir are brave.

Joe said...

DBQ, I don't disagree, but there is a tendency when people get new tools to want to use them. You see this with auto mechanics all the time--they get some new device and start pushing it at you, even though the results often save you less than not having bothered in the first place (or they mess up your car and cause even more repairs.)

I'm reminded of the birth scene in Meaning of Life: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arCITMfxvEc.

OBSTETRICIAN:
Yes. More apparatus, please, nurse: the E.E.G., the B.P. monitor, and the A.V.V.
NURSE #1:
Yes. Certainly, Doctor.
DOCTOR SPENSER:
And, uh, get the machine that goes 'ping'.
OBSTETRICIAN:
And get the most expensive machines, in case the administrator comes.
[clunk]
[exciting music]
That's it. Bring in the other machines. Right over here.

...later...

MR. PYCROFT:
Oh, very impressive. Very impressive. And what are you doing this morning?
[music stops]
OBSTETRICIAN:
It's a birth.
MR. PYCROFT:
Aahh. What sort of thing is that?
DOCTOR SPENSER:
Well, that's when we take a new baby out of a lady's tummy.
MR. PYCROFT:
Wonderful what we can do nowadays.
[ping]
Aah! I see you have the machine that goes 'ping'. This is my favourite. You see, we lease this back from the company we sold it to, and that way, it comes under the monthly current budget and not the capital account. [Applause]

Jeremy said...

mcg - "I am inclined to think, now, that there were indeed signs that this was not a normal fall, that those with experience seemed to know that intuitively, but that intuition was ignored."

It's my understanding from the reports I've read that she was on a "bunny slope" fell and was offered assistance. Being a "celebrity" probably created more of a stir, but people die every day from minor head injuries, and most are just like this one: a concussion that creates bleeding and death.

As an example: Bicycles are associated with more childhood injuries than any other consumer product except the automobile.

Head injury is the leading cause of death in bicycle crashes and account for more than 60 percent of bicycle-related deaths, more than two-thirds of bicycle-related hospital admissions and about one-third of hospital emergency room visits for bicycling injuries.

former law student said...

Real reason - blacks commit violent crime at 10X the rate of whites or Asians. Canada has far less blacks as a percentage of population than the USA does. But in states on the US where blacks are at or below Canada's percentages, violent crime is at or below Canadian rates.

Blacks have been living in Canada for a long time -- Canada was the destination of the Underground Railroad, as a matter of fact -- and blacks from all over the Commonwealth began moving to Canada in the middle of the 1960s. Numbers aside, I think that Canada is simply better at making everyone feel they are part of the community: they have excellent public schools (including the tax-supported Catholic schools), they actively teach immigrants how to assimilate, including English as a second language, and of course they enacted single-payer health care.

It's amazing how far you can get once you treat everyone as if they were equal.

Peter V. Bella said...

Bicycles are associated with more childhood injuries than any other consumer product except the automobile...

I am sure President ObamaPelosi will get around to banning bikes as soon as the find the time and the anti-bike lobby hands over some big cash.

Bruce Hayden said...

The death rates for cerebral hemorrhages in the US are similar to Canada's. Just like cancer or heart conditions. But the Canadians, like the European and advanced Asian nations, tend to live longer than Americans, in part because they do not have 1/6th of working people outside the healthcare insurance system.

I don't know about Canada, but one thing that differs in the U.S. is the care and status of premature babies. Apparently, in at least some of the countries used as examples of longer life, premies are not counted until they hit a certain age, and that does notably impact life span. The differences are apparently significantly reduced if this treatment of premies, and likely babies in general, is controlled for.

BJM said...

It's most likely that Richarson died because she didn't wear a ski helmet. Using her death to argue the pros and cons of universal health is pointless as the Canadian system is as apples and oranges to ours. We expect and demand much more of our health care system than any other society.

We also have the most advanced ER and trauma medicine in the world. The "Golden Hour" transport/treatment protocol is an American EMT/ER standard, one that has saved countless lives, especially accident, stroke and heart attack patients, but is rare outside the US. One could speculate that had Richardson been injured on an American ski slope she may have had a different outcome due to our EMT/ER/Trauma system, or perhaps not, she may have sought care too late in any case.

Diana and Dodi died because they weren't wearing seat belts, only the bodyguard survived, in spite of severe crush injuries, as he was strapped in. Who in their right mind rides in a car racing 100 mph on city streets without a seat belt on?

People make choices, some don't work out for the better. Let's not base our future health care options on hypothetical situations.

Bruce Hayden said...

I indicated in a previous thread that I had been the first on the scene for maybe a dozen or so head injuries two years ago, when I was working part time at a ski area doing speeder control, etc.

If the victim was like Ms. Richardson, it was sometimes hard to get them to the clinic at the base of the mountain. The ski patrol could not force someone to go there, and some, likely worried about the cost, would refuse. But if there were any questions, the ski patrol was very, very, persuasive. And once at the clinic, the person would not be released unless they were confident that this sort of thing would not happen. This is one of the good things about our malpractice environment, in comparison with Canada and other socialized medicine countries. If she had been at a clinic in the U.S. at the bottom of a slope, the staff there would almost assuredly not released her until and unless she was showing NO symptoms. And if she was showing any, then they would have sent her either to an ER room with more facilities, either by ambulance or helicopter.

When there was any hint at head injury, there was a fairly strict protocol that the ski patrol followed. This included constant checks of pupils and questioning about who, where, when, etc. They were, of course, backboarded, had their heads immobilized, and usually put on O2. And, when the symptoms appeared to be getting worse, the clinic was put on trauma alert, and runs even closed down to rush the patient to the clinic.

That said, it took me awhile to start recognizing head injuries. Unlike the ski patrol, I had not had the level of first aid training that they had. I just spent a lot of time in bright yellow on the runs where this sort of thing happened a lot.

And I remember one woman skiing up to me. We talked for awhile. She knew she had been in a collision, but couldn't remember much about it. It was only when I finally asked the who/what/when questions that I realized that we had a problem. And I discovered that she was going through lucid periods, with those getting less frequent. The patrol had diverted her toboggan to a compound fracture above us, and ultimately a patrol on a snomobile showed up to ferry her back up the mountain. I told him my fears, and then all hell broke lose, with about five more patrol, toboggan, backboard, O2, meds, etc. showing up w/i a minute or two.

This skier was definitely one of those who had had a head injury, but wasn't that bad initially. She got worse as things went along, and that is scary. And, yes, she survived.

Bruce Hayden said...

I hear a lot of pros and cons about helmets skiing. I am a firm believer in them, having run my bell several times (through no fault of my own). As I mentioned before, I started doing so a bit over a decade ago, when two docs on my annual male bonding ski trip started. One was a trauma doc who ran an ER, and the other a sports pediatrician who was also a ski patroller.

In the five years that I worked at that ski area doing speeder control, and being involved with dozens and dozens of head injuries, most of them were not wearing helmets. The only ones I remember who were wearing helmets, were hurt in the terrain park or hit trees at a pretty good clip.

Yes, I agree that when hitting a tree at a high enough speed is likely to kill you regardless, and landing inverted from a decent sized jump is also going to do damage. But that is not what most people deal with at ski areas. More likely are the Natasha Richardsons who can't ski or ride fast enough to kill themselves that way. And, for them, a helmet might save their lives.

Jeremy said...

Peter - "I am sure President ObamaPelosi will get around to banning bikes as soon as the find the time and the anti-bike lobby hands over some big cash."

Well, based on this comment, it appears Peter has personal first-hand experience.

Jeremy said...

As to blacks, crime, prison:

Jim Webb:

With 2.3 million people behind bars, the United States has imprisoned a higher percentage of its population than any other nation, according to the Pew Center on the States and other groups. Although the United States has only 5 percent of the world's population, it has 25 percent of its prison population, Webb says.

A disproportionate number of those who are incarcerated are black, Webb notes. African Americans make up 13 percent of the population, but they comprise more than half of all prison inmates, compared with one-third two decades ago. Today, Webb says, a black man without a high school diploma has a 60 percent chance of going to prison.

Webb aims much of his criticism at enforcement efforts that he says too often target low-level drug offenders and parole violators, rather than those who perpetrate violence, such as gang members. He also blames policies that strip felons of citizenship rights and can hinder their chances of finding a job after release. He says he believes society can be made safer while making the system more humane and cost-effective.

- And if you think the taxpayer isn't getting soaked, you're kidding yourselves.

fcai said...

Jim Webb, in addition to being delusional, is a criminal.

JAL said...

Answer: Probably a yes. If there isn't a local hospital with a CT machine and the option of medivac near a famous, challenging (and wealthy) ski resort someone isn't doing health planning very well.

From what I've read - she would have had to seek medical treatment in the first two minutes, as she probably had internal bleeding.

Not true. If she tore her aorta or carotid artery ...

But a FOUR HOUR ambulance ride instead of being medivaced was a guarantee with a serious head injury that the odds were against her.

That was bizarre. And very bad.

Our local hospital is the trauma center for area in southern Appalachians. We've had a helo for 25 years. Filthy capitalists.

Daughter and son-in-law are both ER docs. Son-in-law snow boards / skis every year with his college buddies. They all wear helmets.

AJ Lynch said...

Jeremy said:

"Right now we're all paying for those who can't afford insurance, one way or another."

So do you think your family's costs will go down if we go to universal coverage?

Peter V. Bella said...

Well, based on this comment, it appears Peter has personal first-hand experience.

They are Democrats. Obama is a Chicago Democrat and was discovered by, nurtured in, and trained by the corrupt Chicago Democrat Machine. Pelosi, the real President, cut her teeth doing patronage and other favors for her father, a corrupt Democrat mayor.

What part of this don't you understand. Oh, and Democrats do have a history of banning things- guns, smoking, fois gras, and various other things that make our day to day life pleasant and secure.

Peter V. Bella said...

So do you think your family's costs will go down if we go to universal coverage?

Nah, he will just get that warm feeling all over knowing he is paying for other people's insurance. That is altruism. Doing things that give you a warm feeling. Sort of like pissing on yourself while wearing a dark suit.

Pogo said...

America is slowly becoming a nation of pussies. With socialized medicine, we'll finally agree with the rest of the candy-assed EU and wimps in Canada that the State knows what's best for you, that you are too much of a child to make any decisions about the most intimate of all choices, your health.

Your betters will take your money and tell you what kind of gruel you'll get, and you'll like it.

Congratulations, serfs, you have nothing to gain but your chains.

Emily Carson said...

I have a relative who lives in Quebec and knows alot more about this than any of you do.

Richardson died because when an ambulance was called the people at the ski resort, worried about bad press and believing that she wasn't hurt very badly told them to leave.

There is a lawsuit very likely to be filed soon, and it will be directed against certain officials and employees of the ski resort, not anybody associated with her treatment.

Don't speculate about things you really don't know much about.

Peter V. Bella said...

America is slowly becoming a nation of pussies…

Thank you Pogo. You rock! You da man!

Laura(southernxyl) said...

Here is the story of a girl who had a very similar injury, and who fortunately was saved by surgery ... two days after the incident. Also some useful information about identifying these things.

former law student said...

that you are too much of a child to make any decisions about the most intimate of all choices, your health.

decisions about pogo's health care are a private matter between him and his lover, the insurance company.

I was sad to hear that dbq's husband is uninsurable. Hopefully he can hang in there till his fellow wage earners start paying for his health care.

Pogo said...

"a private matter between him and his lover, the insurance company."

Bullshit, and you know it. Because of dorks like you, pinhead socialists all, my insurance is horribly expensive because I have to pay for all sorts of govt.-mandated shit I do not want, but I also have to pay for Medicare.

Every stupid little unfunded mandate the states and feds concoct raises my bill. You goddamned fascists.

Peter V. Bella said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Peter V. Bella said...

"Did Socialized Medicine Kill Natasha Richardson?"

No, a tree killed her.

AJ Lynch said...

FLS:

I'll answer for DBQ. Her husband would prefer fewer govt regulations so health INSURANCE premiums would be more reasonable and less restrictive.

It's the pussy lazy liberals (the type you are always defending) who are whining all the time that they want free health CARE. That is because they have decided they prefer to be permanent "helpless" wards of the state. For that reason, they don't have the foggiest idea why anyone would want INSURANCE.

PatCA said...

I find it hard to believe that the resort told the ambulance to leave for fear of bad publicity! What bad publicity, that people get injured skiing? The ski instructor stayed with her the whole time and tried to get her to go to hospital.

Good grief.

Peter V. Bella said...

Does anyone really care what killed some bobled headed actress? I mean, it is not like she saved the free world or anything.

Freeman Hunt said...

Bullshit, and you know it. Because of dorks like you, pinhead socialists all, my insurance is horribly expensive because I have to pay for all sorts of govt.-mandated shit I do not want, but I also have to pay for Medicare.

Yes! There is so much garbage in insurance coverage. Thank you, Great State.

ron st.amant said...

It's so nice that so many people who don't actually LIVE in Canada have such a great grasp on how horrible it is...
However as someone who DOES live in Canada, I can tell you that in the six years I've lived here, have been treated by doctors, been in the ER, been hospitalized, been in after-care not ONCE did I ever encounter anyone who works for the government. The government not ONCE was consulted on the type of care I received. Not ONCE did a bureaucrat tell my doctors what procedures they may or may not use to treat me.
The care I've received, my wife and children have received has been equal to any treatment I ever received in the 34 years I lived in the States.
Health care and the speed of care is determined on site by the doctors, not the government.

From New Year's Eve to January 10 I was hospitalized after being taken to the ER. The 4 neurologists who assisted me determined after many tests that I had a variant of a viral menengitis. I received all the medication and treatment that anyone in that situation would be given in the States.
The only difference is that when I got home I got a bill for $45 to cover the ambulance ride and $2 a day for a phone in my room.
A grand total of $65 folks.
Today I've totally recovered and feel great.

The system isn't perfect, and it could use more money for more MRI machines in the smaller towns outside the major cities is one of the big drawbacks at the moment. But treatment is not withheld from the old, or the other myths that have been explored here.

Beau said...

The only difference is that when I got home I got a bill for $45 to cover the ambulance ride and $2 a day for a phone in my room.

You had to pay for the ambulance? What a ripoff. Seriously. I went to my local hospital in November by ambulance at no charge. Emergency gall bladder surgery and no charge to me for the five nights.

My employer pays the $108. cost a month for myself and my husband. It is a taxable benefit however.

Pogo said...

" The government not ONCE was consulted on the type of care I received. Not ONCE did a bureaucrat tell my doctors what procedures they may or may not use to treat me."

Good God, please tell me people as stupid as you are do not vote; but alas, they do. And they have. And the stupid and weak have voted for corporate fascism; gummint control of the hospitals and clinics.

The decisions on treatments and procedures allowed are made before you ever get to the ER, you bonehead, by determining what is covered and what is not, what surgeries are done and what are not, how many of each can be done this fiscal year, how many machines will be bought, how many helicopters are available, what drugs can be used, how many ICU beds there are, how many surgical suites, how many specialists there are, and how long the wait is.

All those decisions are made by bureaucrats without consulting anyone, well prior to your illness.

Good lord, are all Canadians this hellishly blank of thought? However do they manage to tie their shoes in the morning?

But I suspect that, like all good leftists, you're simply lying.

Pogo said...

Or, OMG!, Canadian health care makes you go full retard.

You'll never get the Oscar now, ron st.amant.
**sads**

Duncan said...

It's not the helicopter, it's the lack of a CT Scan/neurosurgeon at the local hospital.

A few years ago, Canada was rationing use of what CT machines they did have. Since they weren't being/couldn't afford to be used full time, vets were using them to scan cats and dogs (since vet care isn't nationalized). It was reported in the papers and then banned.

They don't have as many CT machines per capita and as many high-end emergency facilities as we do.

Delay is a killer.

Beau said...

All those decisions are made by bureaucrats without consulting anyone, well prior to your illness.

Something an HMO never does, thank God.

Pogo said...

'Something an HMO never does, thank God.'

Your choices amongst insurance carriers have been extremely limited by the government, and their required offerings legislated as well. HMOs are socialist care writ small.

That is, our health care has been partially socialized already. Now it's going to get worse.

Thanks, Democrats.

former law student said...

That is, our health care has been partially socialized already.

I blame corporate capitalism for this. Noticing that health care costs were spiraling out of control, corporations who paid for their employees' health insurance told insurance companies they were going to have to cut costs. The insurance cos. wrote up lists of what they were and were not going to pay for. Physicians had to grovel to the insurance cos. to get their pretreatment plans signed off, lest they provide unreimbursed care.

I don't see much of the hand of government here, just prudent buyers.