Is health care a human right?

[bhsmte]

Angiograms are low risk, high benefit (I've had two). They are the 'gold standard' test for CAD, the biggest cause of heart disease. Those other tests are fine but don't address CAD directly. I'm suggesting using angiograms for prevention, especially with those with a family history of CAD.

Again to the risk. Many interactions with doctors, hospitals, and drugs, are more risky than this procedure. And few diagnostic procedures would offer the same benefits, especially in America where 350,000 people develop CAD each year.

You can suggest what you like. The reality is, angiograms are not used for prevention, they are used to diagnose specific blockage. Since the blockage is already there, this is not prvention, but a higher level test to diagnose, which is not needed right off the bat.

 

[bhsmte]

If healthcare is a human right, does that mean the government can force people to be doctors? Can they prevent doctors from leaving the profession?

Well, you have the right to an attorney in the US and no one is forcing anyone to be lawyers. You have a right to a fair trial and no one is forcing anyone to be a judge.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No more so than the freedom to bear arms forces people to become gun dealers or freedom of religion forces people to be priests.

Healthcare as a right acknowledges the fact that people in our society shouldn't die from treatable diseases just because they can't afford it. People shouldn't die just because they are poor when we, as a nation, can afford to have them treated. It's a question of basic human decency. Should a child die of leukemia simply because that child happened to be born to poor parents? Should a hard working blue collar dad have to choose between chemotherapy and bankrupting his family?

We have already made these decisions when it comes to education, transportation, police, and the host of other public services that are offered to everyone equally and paid for based on income. What type of country would we be if poor kids couldn't go to school because it cost too much? What if the police let crimes happen to poor people because they couldn't pay the fees the cops were asking for?

Your actual life is even more important than education and police, so why should we put our lives at risk on a free market whose overriding incentive is profit?

So tax the profits and increase Medicaid spending. Problem solved.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You can suggest what you like. The reality is, angiograms are not used for prevention, they are used to diagnose specific blockage. Since the blockage is already there, this is not prevention, but a higher level test to diagnose, which is not needed right off the bat.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Apples and oranges, however the French are getting fatter.

Why French People Are Thin (Hint: It’s Not Their Diet)

Not apples and oranges. Rather apples and deep fried greasy suggar bombs.
Again, a healthy lifestyle can never be imposed - but it can be taught.

And when the standard is to give kids unhealthy lunches, you're doing it wrong.

 

[DogmaHunter]

American healthcare is built on drugs. One hour of surgery, the rest of your life on drugs.

American healthcare is built on (monster)profits - for parties that don't actually add any value to the care itself.

In a very real sense, it is also built on elitism.
In the US, health seems to be on par with a luxury product.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Not apples and oranges. Rather apples and deep fried greasy suggar bombs.
Again, a healthy lifestyle can never be imposed - but it can be taught.

And when the standard is to give kids unhealthy lunches, you're doing it wrong.

Healthy meals can be imposed at home. Of course the parents have to be educated and motivated. The biggest problem I see is the low activity level of many kids. As kids we were always outdoors, winter and summer. It was television that cleared the parks and streets of kids playing. Today it's computer games and texting, or just 'hanging out' with no physical activity involved.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

American healthcare is built on (monster)profits - for parties that don't actually add any value to the care itself.

In a very real sense, it is also built on elitism.
In the US, health seems to be on par with a luxury product.

I agree. That's why it's imperative that those in the lower income level take a healthy and safe lifestyle very seriously. The irony is that the lower income group can actually be healthier that those who are better off but who rely too much on medicine to keep them 'healthy'.

 

[Jimmy D]

No more so than the freedom to bear arms forces people to become gun dealers or freedom of religion forces people to be priests.

Healthcare as a right acknowledges the fact that people in our society shouldn't die from treatable diseases just because they can't afford it. People shouldn't die just because they are poor when we, as a nation, can afford to have them treated. It's a question of basic human decency. Should a child die of leukemia simply because that child happened to be born to poor parents? Should a hard working blue collar dad have to choose between chemotherapy and bankrupting his family?

We have already made these decisions when it comes to education, transportation, police, and the host of other public services that are offered to everyone equally and paid for based on income. What type of country would we be if poor kids couldn't go to school because it cost too much? What if the police let crimes happen to poor people because they couldn't pay the fees the cops were asking for?

Your actual life is even more important than education and police, so why should we put our lives at risk on a free market whose overriding incentive is profit?

Sounds a bit "European" to me, what are you, some sort of communist or something?

 

[szechuan]

I agree. That's why it's imperative that those in the lower income level take a healthy and safe lifestyle very seriously. The irony is that the lower income group can actually be healthier that those who are better off but who rely too much on medicine to keep them 'healthy'.

It's harder for Lower Income people to lead healthy lifestyles.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It's harder for Lower Income people to lead healthy lifestyles.

The difficulty is often in their heads.....lack of knowledge, especially when it comes to health. I grew up poor, but very healthy.

 

[szechuan]

The difficulty is often in their heads.....lack of knowledge, especially when it comes to health. I grew up poor, but very healthy.

Depends on Location, area and how often you're able to cook.
Fact of the matter eating Healthy with Low Income for the Majority is a lot harder then for Rich People.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Depends on Location, area and how often you're able to cook.
Fact of the matter eating Healthy with Low Income for the Majority is a lot harder then for Rich People.

For some probably, but most can overcome the hurdles. Their biggest problem is tradition and habits. Another problem is that their activists and advocates insist that they can't buy healthy food unless they have more money, which of course is false.

 

[szechuan]

For some probably, but most can overcome the hurdles. Their biggest problem is tradition and habits. Another problem is that their activists and advocates insist that they can't buy healthy food unless they have more money, which of course is false.

That is not true what so ever, it's called Time and Money, Low Wage workers don't have as much time nor do they have as much money.

Eating Healthy for the most part takes time and also takes more money as Healthy Foods that are good to eat take time and also you need to know how to cook.

You are completely wrong, Eating Healthier is much easier for the rich then the poor, that is an undeniable fact.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That is not true what so ever, it's called Time and Money, Low Wage workers don't have as much time nor do they have as much money.

So why does it seem that the wealthy are always in a hurry, and often eat 'on the fly'. Poor people spend more time eating than the rich. You can tell by the higher obesity rates among them.

Eating Healthy for the most part takes time and also takes more money as Healthy Foods that are good to eat take time and also you need to know how to cook.

How much time and skill does it take to fry an egg, make toast, and pour a glass of milk?

You are completely wrong, Eating Healthier is much easier for the rich then the poor, that is an undeniable fact.

Eating healthy isn't any more difficult or expensive than eating poorly. Do some research instead of parroting the liberal activist line.

 

[szechuan]

So why does it seem that the wealthy are always in a hurry, and often eat 'on the fly'. Poor people spend more time eating than the rich. You can tell by the higher obesity rates among them.

You have your statistics Wrong, most poor people don't spend more time eating then the rich.
and the rich aren't in a hurry to eat.

How much time and skill does it take to fry an egg, make toast, and pour a glass of milk?

Poor people can't afford those things, milk and eggs on a skillet?
That's expensive compared to instant noodles.

Eating healthy isn't any more difficult or expensive than eating poorly. Do some research instead of parroting the liberal activist line.

Sorry but It's not Parroting Liberal Activist Lines, those are the truths. You seriously think borderline Poverty people can afford Eggs?

What's cheaper, Instant Noodles, Instant Cheap foods, or Milk and Eggs, seems like it's been a while since you've been to the grocery store.

1 dollar for a can of unhealthy Mini Ravioli as an example that can feed 1 person 2 at most.
Target : Expect More. Pay Less.

And you're telling me it's cheaper to be full on Milk and Eggs and it's less expensive? That is a bunch of lies.

 

[faroukfarouk]

You have your statistics Wrong, most poor people don't spend more time eating then the rich.
and the rich aren't in a hurry to eat.



Poor people can't afford those things, milk and eggs on a skillet?
That's expensive compared to instant noodles.




Sorry but It's not Parroting Liberal Activist Lines, those are the truths. You seriously think borderline Poverty people can afford Eggs?

What's cheaper, Instant Noodles, Instant Cheap foods, or Milk and Eggs, seems like it's been a while since you've been to the grocery store.

1 dollar for a can of unhealthy Mini Ravioli as an example that can feed 1 person 2 at most.
Target : Expect More. Pay Less.

And you're telling me it's cheaper to be full on Milk and Eggs and it's less expensive? That is a bunch of lies.

I do appreciate the dollar stores; although some of the typical dollar store food has a lot more calories than some of the available supermarket options.

 

[szechuan]

I do appreciate the dollar stores; although some of the typical dollar store food has a lot more calories than some of the available supermarket options.

agreed, and the food in the dollar stores are unhealthy for the most parts. Such as hot pockets, mostly all instant microwavable foods along with junk food.

People who say it's easier to eat healthy as a poor person is lying through there teeth and or just plain ignorant.

 

[faroukfarouk]

agreed, and the food in the dollar stores are unhealthy for the most parts. Such as hot pockets, mostly all instant microwavable foods along with junk food.

People who say it's easier to eat healthy as a poor person is lying through there teeth and or just plain ignorant.

I don't think, though, that the answer is to make bureaucracy responsible for what daily food people are "allowed" to choose, or to try to buck supply and demand.

 

[szechuan]

I don't think, though, that the answer is to make bureaucracy responsible for what daily food people are "allowed" to choose, or to try to buck supply and demand.

agreed, personally it is an issue of Education and what we promote at schools in America. It's possible for Poor people to eat Healthy, but it's just harder for them to eat properly either due to Time, Money, or Area as they do not have access to vehicles but usually rely on public transportation.