Final Essay

Socialized healthcare, or how it is more commonly known as “free healthcare for all”, is harmful for the people of the United States. I believe that it is against the citizen’s of the U.S. best interests for this to be a reality. It is a big deal that people of the country are educated on this topic before it comes time to vote. There are many things on the news as well as by the democratic candidates that are said about this issue, that I have learned to be false, or misleading in many cases. Whenever I find the news or politicians misleading in a way, I enjoy learning what the truth is and why they would want to mislead, intentionally or if they are just ignorant on a specific topic, either way it is dangerous to the people when that does happen. The following are facts and statistics from my research of this topic, along with my opinion about some aspects of the topic. I believe that universal healthcare should not be implemented in the United States.

The first reason why socialized healthcare should not be implemented in the United States is because it will lower the quality of care that people will receive.

For future reference, “A ‘delayed transfer of care’ occurs when a patient is in the wrong care setting for their current level of need — e.g. when a patient is ready to depart from hospital, but problems relating to their transfer mean that they are still occupying a bed”(kingsfund.uk).

In a study published by the National Institute of Health states that “The United States may report as live births more low-birth-weight babies who are at high risk of dying on the first day, and then register those who die as infant deaths.” In other countries, an infant can die days after being born and not be counted as an “infant mortality.” One study published in the British journal found that differences in the definition of “infant mortality” account for up to 40% of the variation in death rates among Western European countries”.

A more accurate way to compare quality of health care would be to measure things where medical intervention clearly makes a difference. Things like survival rates for cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, recovery from surgery, access to new drugs. For example, the U.S. scores better on cancer survival rates than other countries that are said to have higher quality health care based on longevity and infant mortality.

To show a comparison between the systems of the UK and Canada, in terms of people without care or a delay of care, in an article in the British newspaper The Guardian noted in 2015 that “ Tens of thousands of Canadians come to the United States to get care they can’t get from their own “guaranteed” health care system. In 2016, 63,459 Canadians did so, according to the Canadian-based Fraser Institute”.

In The US National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine

It was stated that the amount of medical equipment, is way lower proportionally than in the United States. “ In 1997 Canada’s 53 MRIs meant one for every 572,000 citizens (contrast that figure to 2046 MRIs in the U.S., one for every 130,800 Americans). Access to open heart surgery and organ transplantation is also restricted. That same year the 245 CT scanners in Canada meant one for every 123,500 citizens. The United States had 3667 CT scanners, one for every 73,000 Americans” (Henderson 487). Recent studies found Canadian deficits in several areas including cardiac and intensive care. Waiting lists for certain surgical and diagnostic procedures are common in Canada. Nationwide, the average wait for treatment is 13.3 weeks. The average waiting time in more than 80% of the procedures is one third longer than Canadian physicians consider clinically reasonable. People in Canada are giving up their access to both modern and timely care. The people that are especially affected by the delays are the elderly people who are not able to get the care that they need in the urgent manner that they need it in many cases, “including hip replacement, cataract surgery and cardiovascular surgery”(The British Medical Journal).

The second reason Universal healthcare should not be implemented in the United States is it will lower the incentives for people to go into the medical field and will drastically reduce the amount of doctors and medical staff.

The third reason is that it will lead to more deaths per year. According to the Foundation for Economic Education, “If America had the 30-day stroke-mortality rate of the UK, for example, we could expect about an additional 38,000 deaths a year. For Canada, that number would be around 43,500”.

It would seem to many people after reading the facts and some statistics that there would be a common sense from people to not try to implement socialized healthcare, in any nationwide or statewide format.I believe that if more people were exposed to this there would be less people in favor of the system that would break down the healthcare field in many ways including those I have mentioned. Whoever reads this, please read the facts and common misconceptions not only about healthcare, but every topic that is to be voted on. I know that a more informed citizen base in the country leads to smarter decisions at the polls.

References

Kumar, Rajender, and Ritika Gandhi. “Reasons for cancellation of operation on the day of intended surgery in a multidisciplinary 500 bedded hospital.” Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology vol. 28,1 (2012): 66–9. doi:10.4103/0970–9185.92442

The US National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine

a study published by the National Institute of Health.

British National Health Service

Related posts:

The initial two weeks of Amal Academy are just like the beautiful transformation of a butterfly. Amal Academy, a transformative program focused on professional and personal development, has the power…

Humans and our desire to be together and eat together