[October 8, 2007 @ 11:43 am] David Catron

Advocates of “single-payer” health care become very touchy when it is equated with socialized medicine. And this is understandable. They wish to depict government-run health care in a positive light, and socialized medicine has a well-deserved reputation for inefficiency and poor care.

But is there any real difference, in practice, between these two types of government-run systems? As it happens, both versions have been in the news recently, and the reports suggest that “single-payer” health care and socialized medicine produce equally dismal outcomes. 

Great Britain’s National Health Service is, of course, a socialized system. The Daily Mail reports on a new study confirming the NHS as an utterly abominable health care system:

The study found that the Health Service is still one of Europe’s worst healthcare providers, in the same league as countries such as Slovenia and Hungary which spend far less on health.

Why? Well, among other problems, the NHS produces abysmal cancer survival rates:

The study backs up a recent Italian report which placed Britain near the bottom of a European table for the chances of its patients still being alive five years after being diagnosed with cancer.

Meanwhile, in Australia’s “single-payer” health care system is also letting its patients down. The Sydney Morning Herald reports the following:

Thousands of X-rays and other medical scans are not being interpreted by radiologists in Sydney hospitals because of outdated technology and a national shortage of radiologists.

And this has dire implications for Australian patients:

The Opposition health spokeswoman, Jillian Skinner, said the backlog at some hospitals was putting patients in danger by delaying the diagnosis of potential conditions, including cancer. 

Outdated technology, physician shortages, patients at risk—this is government-run health care. And government-run health care, whatever you call it, always produces the same unacceptable results.

One comment

  1. BobMan Says:

    Government Health Care is inevitable.

    GM Pact Calls for a Push for Health Care Reform
    The New York Times

    By Micheline Maynard and Mary M. Chapman

    Oct. 6, 2007

    DETROIT – For years, General Motors has said it supports the United Automobile Workers union in its push for change in the nation’s health care system. Now the UAW has persuaded GM to put its money where its mouth is.

    In a labor agreement reached last week between the company and the [UAW], GM has agreed to spend up to $15 million over the next few years to create a National Institute for Health Care Reform.
    Now that Motown is getting serious about socializing all costs while privatizing profits, the old fashioned medical system is DOOMED!

    Long Live the Health Czar!

Add a comment

To prevent spam, you will need to enter the two words below before your post is accepted: