Nickname: WorldCurrency

Review: Insurance (health, retirement) does not work if you cherrypick. It only works if everybody participates and keeps the system simple. "Socialized medicine" does not work in Britain but works admirably in France because they have socialized the health insurance system but not the mostly private caregiving system. Fanaticism (blind application of one principle disregarding feedback from reality) never works, not even with capitalism. It seems politicians have lost the will to improve the lives of their constituents because they think things will take care of themselves.

Date reviewed: Sep 26, 2006 4:20 PM

Nickname: Mike

Review: How about Americans taking responsibility for their own health-care problems? You can lower costs by losing some of that extra poundage, exercising and giving up smoking, just to name the most obvious things. The easy part is blaming somebody else...try looking in the mirror.

Date reviewed: Sep 26, 2006 12:45 PM

Nickname: Physician

Review: Health care is regional. Except for medical schools, the rural south with 90% of the Medicare poor blacks pulls down the national statistics. Increased access increases the extremes. Cut access, cut costs. Rationing like Oregon os the most eglitarian. No care for risky behavior like alcohol, tobacco, cocaine, etc.

Date reviewed: Sep 24, 2006 12:16 PM

Nickname: John

Review: Our health is a matter of individual responsibility not a priority of government. If you follow the typical American diet you are certain to contract one or more of the ubiquitous deadly diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, cancer or suffer from obesity. The government is at fault for promoting their absurd food pyramid, which should be turned upside down. The FDA is at fault for promoting the cause of "Big Pharma" and their toxic remedies rather than the consumer. But anyone who adheres to this nonsense is also at fault. It is easy enough to find good nutrition advice from competent alternative sources via the Internet.

Date reviewed: Sep 23, 2006 5:23 AM

Nickname: liz

Review: America does indeed ration health services. Try the diagnosis Borrelia. People are hoo-dooed into thinking DNA PCR test is no sufficient evidence to diagnosis this spirochete illness. Remember Tuskegee? It's in replay. Nobody cares. Borrelia patients have been disenfranchised from the market. The disabled sick in America and the docs treating this disease are being hauled into medical boards, limiting care for spirochetes! America said never again. America lied.

Date reviewed: Sep 22, 2006 11:11 AM

Nickname: blinx

Review: You spend more on healthcare because you are subsidizing people who can't pay, and the rise in charges only results in more dropouts--a classic feedback loop that should see increased prices for those who can pay. You had a chance when the Clintons were in office. They had 12 million to sell their plan. The Republicans plus various special interest groups spent somewhere in the region of $300 million to oppose it. The richest country in the world is not necessarily the smartest.

Date reviewed: Sep 22, 2006 9:05 AM

Nickname: Insurance whistle-blower

Review: Our health care expenditurea are so high because the majority of each "health care dollar" goes to administration and administrators. We continue to cut payments to physicians, but there have been no economical or life-stat improvements. Hmmm. Could it be that physicians aren't the problem? Our CEOs and other "directors" earn over $300,000/year (some earn much more). They have large expense accounts and don't work even 40/hours per week. Compare that to the national average income for a physician who works 60-80 hours per week!

Date reviewed: Sep 22, 2006 4:20 AM

Nickname: Zaphod

Review: I question the "average" number of 2.7 deaths per 1000 live births for the "best" countries. Where is this number coming from? For example, official statistics say 5.0 for Sweden in 2005, including perinatal deaths. Encyclopaedia Britannica in its 2005 yearbook says 2.2 for Iceland in 2002, 3.0 for Japan in 2003, and 3.3 for Sweden in 2002. Its number is defined as how many children die within the first month of their birth. An average figure as low as 2.7 is highly improbable, but could concievably happen for a specific year. Mentioning this number without any reference to the source and method undermines the credibility of the whole article. Can we really trust the other numbers?

Date reviewed: Sep 22, 2006 3:56 AM

Nickname: Daniel

Review: I have lived in many countries around the world and all of them get a "D" in health care. The problem in the US is there are no standard insurance policies so too much is spent on marketing and administration. Second is the legal system. Not only does the US legal system add 20% to the cost of medical care, it also prevents innovations and sane policies. The result is that even if we wanted to give everyone good health care tomorrow we couldn't afford it under our current system.

Date reviewed: Sep 22, 2006 3:11 AM

Nickname: SANDY

Review: My husband is retired on Medicare. We found out last week he has prostrate cancer and we're waiting to see if it's operable. Medicare and his company insurance is letting us down. We spend our lives to live comfortably when we retire and government lets us down. I'm sure I will have to go into my 401K to cover what's needed and where will that leave me when I need it. I'm so disappointed with it all. We pay all our lives for our retirement and one bad medical debt will wipe us out. I have 11 years before I can retire and it looks gloomy for me.

Date reviewed: Sep 22, 2006 2:34 AM