Comments on: Return of the Death Panels? http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/ Health Care Policy and Reform Insights | NCPA Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:03:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Linda Gorman http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69624 Linda Gorman Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:20:07 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69624 ArtK--Are you still claiming 45,000 deaths from a lack of health insurance? This blog has published a number of entries giving detailed explanations of the way in which the 45,000 number was constructed, why it is incorrect, and why it is therefore little more than a made-up number useful only as a talking points for the uninformed. At some point, serious discussion requires engaging the other side's arguments. ArtK–Are you still claiming 45,000 deaths from a lack of health insurance? This blog has published a number of entries giving detailed explanations of the way in which the 45,000 number was constructed, why it is incorrect, and why it is therefore little more than a made-up number useful only as a talking points for the uninformed.

At some point, serious discussion requires engaging the other side’s arguments.

]]> By: John Goodman http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69621 John Goodman Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:01:00 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69621 Chris Jacobs has a good summary of Berwick's most controversial views here: http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Berwick-Top-Ten.pdf Chris Jacobs has a good summary of Berwick’s most controversial views here: http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Berwick-Top-Ten.pdf

]]> By: Robert http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69620 Robert Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:55:17 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69620 artk: Please stay consistent. You can't jump from statistic to statistic and claim that John and Devon are giving the "standard response" when it has been known for some time now the PNHP study about deaths due to a lack of insurance was seriously flawed. Are you saying that what Devon is showing as a serious flaw to the study is not a flaw, but is accurate and acceptable? That one interview 19 yrs ago is acceptable, and that becasue they were uninsured then they were uninsured when they died, and that even if they had insurance they would not have died? Rather than accuse them of "standard" answers please explain to us how the study is not flawed and it should be used for the purposes of national healthcare policy? artk: Please stay consistent. You can’t jump from statistic to statistic and claim that John and Devon are giving the “standard response” when it has been known for some time now the PNHP study about deaths due to a lack of insurance was seriously flawed. Are you saying that what Devon is showing as a serious flaw to the study is not a flaw, but is accurate and acceptable? That one interview 19 yrs ago is acceptable, and that becasue they were uninsured then they were uninsured when they died, and that even if they had insurance they would not have died? Rather than accuse them of “standard” answers please explain to us how the study is not flawed and it should be used for the purposes of national healthcare policy?

]]> By: Bart Ingles http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69573 Bart Ingles Wed, 14 Jul 2010 23:00:04 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69573 <blockquote>"Every statistic that shows deficiencies in our system is flawed: life expectancy; infant mortality..."</blockquote> I don't know about every statistic, but those two are certainly flawed. They reflect on too much outside our health care system to be useful. Back to the main topic, what's wrong with having an avowed rationer in charge of Medicare and Medicaid? Isn't this more-or-less what those programs need (mostly more)? I just wouldn't want him running <i>all</i> of health care.

“Every statistic that shows deficiencies in our system is flawed: life expectancy; infant mortality…”

I don’t know about every statistic, but those two are certainly flawed. They reflect on too much outside our health care system to be useful.

Back to the main topic, what’s wrong with having an avowed rationer in charge of Medicare and Medicaid? Isn’t this more-or-less what those programs need (mostly more)? I just wouldn’t want him running all of health care.

]]> By: artk http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69570 artk Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:48:48 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69570 John, Devon: Thank's for the standard response. Every statistic that shows deficiencies in our system is flawed: life expectancy; infant mortality; any study showing an obvious problem. Every anecdote about the horrors of one of the universal health care systems is the gold standard. John, Devon: Thank’s for the standard response. Every statistic that shows deficiencies in our system is flawed: life expectancy; infant mortality; any study showing an obvious problem. Every anecdote about the horrors of one of the universal health care systems is the gold standard.

]]> By: John Goodman http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69565 John Goodman Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:01:44 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69565 Devon and artk, the studies were not merely flawed they were conducted by people who basically don't know anything about economics. Which is the same thing as saying that they don't know anything about statistical inference in complex social systems. Devon and artk, the studies were not merely flawed they were conducted by people who basically don’t know anything about economics. Which is the same thing as saying that they don’t know anything about statistical inference in complex social systems.

]]> By: Devon Herrick http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69561 Devon Herrick Wed, 14 Jul 2010 21:29:57 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69561 Artk, I am familiar with the study by Physicians for a National Health Program, claiming 45,000 people die each year from lack of health insurance. This was the latest in a string of flawed studies analyzing mortality and insurance status. In these studies nobody actually ever counts the bodies of those who supposedly died from being uninsured. In the survey, the subjects were interviewed only once. In other words, we are expected to assume (for the results to be valid) that the uninsured at the beginning of the survey stayed uninsured for a full 19 years! Former CBO Director June O’Neill and her husband Dave (using a similar approach) also looked at this. They found that the involuntarily uninsured (i.e. low-income people) were only 3% more likely to die over a 14-year period than those with health insurance. There was no statistically significant effect on the “voluntarily uninsured” (higher-income people who could afford coverage). Here is a link to John’s Health Affairs Blog post explaining why this study – and all the ones that preceded it are flawed. http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2009/09/21/does-lack-of-insurance-cause-premature-death/ Artk,

I am familiar with the study by Physicians for a National Health Program, claiming 45,000 people die each year from lack of health insurance. This was the latest in a string of flawed studies analyzing mortality and insurance status.

In these studies nobody actually ever counts the bodies of those who supposedly died from being uninsured. In the survey, the subjects were interviewed only once. In other words, we are expected to assume (for the results to be valid) that the uninsured at the beginning of the survey stayed uninsured for a full 19 years!

Former CBO Director June O’Neill and her husband Dave (using a similar approach) also looked at this. They found that the involuntarily uninsured (i.e. low-income people) were only 3% more likely to die over a 14-year period than those with health insurance. There was no statistically significant effect on the “voluntarily uninsured” (higher-income people who could afford coverage).

Here is a link to John’s Health Affairs Blog post explaining why this study – and all the ones that preceded it are flawed. http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2009/09/21/does-lack-of-insurance-cause-premature-death/

]]> By: artk http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69541 artk Wed, 14 Jul 2010 20:03:35 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69541 John, you claim that "Britain is the country where people routinely die because they cannot get the care they need and cannot afford to pay for it on their own, while this almost never happens in the United States." There is well documented evidence that there are annually 45,000 excess deaths because people don't have health insurance. I've included the pointer to the research. Given one of the common threads here is how when the new health care bill goes into effect there's won't be enough doctors to fill the demand, that's another way of saying that there are currently many people with unmet health care needs. Fixating on the flaws of the NHS doesn't fix the flaws in our system. http://pnhp.org/excessdeaths/health-insurance-and-mortality-in-US-adults.pdf excess deaths in the US of a lack of heath insurance. John, you claim that “Britain is the country where people routinely die because they cannot get the care they need and cannot afford to pay for it on their own, while this almost never happens in the United States.”

There is well documented evidence that there are annually 45,000 excess deaths because people don’t have health insurance. I’ve included the pointer to the research. Given one of the common threads here is how when the new health care bill goes into effect there’s won’t be enough doctors to fill the demand, that’s another way of saying that there are currently many people with unmet health care needs. Fixating on the flaws of the NHS doesn’t fix the flaws in our system.

http://pnhp.org/excessdeaths/health-insurance-and-mortality-in-US-adults.pdf

excess deaths in the US of a lack of heath insurance.

]]> By: Virginia http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69540 Virginia Wed, 14 Jul 2010 19:52:36 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69540 I'm thinking that the Brit's shadow market of private insurance is a good thing. It's not as good as a free market, but it's not as bad a 100% state-run health care. It suggests that consumers, when given the option, will make their own purchasing decisions, especially when the state alternative is not so good. I’m thinking that the Brit’s shadow market of private insurance is a good thing. It’s not as good as a free market, but it’s not as bad a 100% state-run health care. It suggests that consumers, when given the option, will make their own purchasing decisions, especially when the state alternative is not so good.

]]> By: Tom H. http://healthblog.ncpa.org/return-of-the-death-panels/comment-page-1/#comment-69539 Tom H. Wed, 14 Jul 2010 19:45:54 +0000 http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=11773#comment-69539 "Dr. NO" is good. But I also like "Rationer in Chief." “Dr. NO” is good. But I also like “Rationer in Chief.”

]]>