Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

Cancer Survival Rates -- US versus Europe

there is no way to "claim your own health" in this country anymore unless you go live in the woods and find an untainted source of water....good luck with that last part. Everything we do is degrading our health. Our society has grown so much before we really realised what we were doing. Every day you're ingesting toxins and being exposed to radiation fields that the human body simply hasn't evolved to deal with effectively. And you can eat all the health food you want, you cannot avoid ingesting toxins or metals or chemicals in some way shape or form. YOu can't do it. The medical "business" knows this and plays off of it. If there was some way to avoid this, than I can see the argument against universal healthcare. When healthfood stops becoming a privilege of the wealthy, than maybe we'll see something.
 
There is a key element that everybody has forgotten in this thread.

We are The United States of America, and we believe health care is not a right. It is a privilege.

Every time somebody argue about the cost of health care per person in any country, you forget that our system is founded upon the individual. You work your way up and get health care because you deserve it, and you shop around the best option. That's how the free market works. That's capitalism. By giving the individual the power to chose, let the hospitals and companies grow and improve themselves.

We have problems with our system, yes. Yet, is the best in the world. Like I said before, we need to fix it, but NOT CHANGE IT.

Bottom line, any type of universal health care converts the health system into a right, and that right attempts directly against Freedom of the individual. NOBODY can force you to pay for someone else health. NOBODY is responsible for someone else health. Just like your own success, your health is personal; is your own privilege, your own achievement. That is call Freedom. Something that the rest of the world lost/forgot a long time ago.

The only rights every human has, is the right to live, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Those rights are established by our existence. Since the day of the creation. All humans are created equal. Based on those principles our system works. Same opportunities and possibilities for everybody, ALWAYS making sure, that the responsibility is INDIVIDUAL. Freedom is non-negotiable. Universal health care, IS NOT an option.

Is your system really about freedom? You have to pay more for insurance if you choose certain lifestyles, sometimes even if you choose to participate in extreme sports.

If you are born with a genetic disorder, you are not equal in the US.

The US does not have the best health care in the world, in the two major international studies by the WHO and the Commonwealth fund, the US ranked between 28th to 37th in the world.


I have heard that the doctor that founded the anti-aging movement has presented a 12 point plan to the government that will revolutionise health care, it is on worldhealth.net.
 
There is a key element that everybody has forgotten in this thread.

We are The United States of America, and we believe health care is not a right. It is a privilege.

I'd say slightly more than half of the voters would disagree with your claim. Speak for yourself.
 
I'd say slightly more than half of the voters would disagree with your claim. Speak for yourself.
Let's make it fun. Let's hope that he needs it and see what it's like without. Wouldn't that be funny? It's like that protester who got injured at a rally and needs donations to pay for his healthcare. It could only be funnier if it happened to his children.
 
Thank you all for adding up your answers but I think no one has correctly answered the question. I would like to be on the topic mentioned i.e. mention the breast cancer survival rates. I have read that Arizona has the lowest survival rates. But not aware of how it is going in Europe.

Got few things to learn from womenhealthzone[dot]com/womens-health/breast-cancer/what-are-the-breast-cancer-survival-rates/
 
Every time somebody argue about the cost of health care per person in any country, you forget that our system is founded upon the individual.

Oh, I didn't realize that Ayn Rand wrote the Constitution...
 
Oh, I didn't realize that Ayn Rand wrote the Constitution...

No, freedom-loving men who realized how dangerous a government that is too expansive and too powerful did.

They saw it coming, and we screwed it up anyway. It's not like we weren't warned.
 
plunkster: if you are against healthcare so much then why not give yours up then? I will gladly take it off your hands. being self employed I do not have access to healthcare.

i'm sure you get it free from your job, typical republican thinking.. I have it so screw everyone else
 
plunkster: if you are against healthcare so much then why not give yours up then? I will gladly take it off your hands. being self employed I do not have access to healthcare.

i'm sure you get it free from your job, typical republican thinking.. I have it so screw everyone else

I am against government-run health care, not health care.

I too am self-employed and we self-insure with an insurance cap and a third-party administrator.

If you want health insurance, go buy some. I'm guessing you're instead just standing around waiting for someone else to pay for it and hand it to you, which is typical Democratic thinking.
 
Where are you getting your statistics from?

There was a study done, however it used cancer survival rates from the 1990s, and cancer survival rates
have changed since then.

BBC NEWS | Health | Huge gap in world cancer survival

Page last updated at 23:13 GMT, Wednesday, 16 July 2008 00:13 UK

There is a huge variation in cancer survival rates across the world, a global study shows.

The US, Australia, Canada, France and Japan had the highest five-year survival rates, while Algeria had the worst, Lancet Oncology reported.

The UK fared pretty poorly, trailing most of its western European neighbours - although the data is from the 1990s since when survival rates have risen.

Spending on health care was a major factor, the study of 31 countries said.

Researchers said higher spending often meant quicker access to tests and treatment.

The research was carried out by more than 100 scientists across the world led by Professor Michel Coleman, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

It involved analysing data on more than two million cancer patients who were diagnosed and treated during the 1990s.

The study showed the US had the highest five-year survival rates for breast cancer at 83.9% and prostate cancer at 91.9%.

Japan came out best for male colon and rectal cancers, at 63% and 58.2% respectively, while France fared best for women with those cancers at 60.1% and 63.9%.

The UK had 69.7% survival for breast cancer, just above 40% for colon and rectal cancer for both men and women and 51.1% for prostate cancer.

There were also large regional variations within the UK, which were linked to differences in access to care and ability of patients to navigate the local health services. Both are directly linked to deprivation.

A Department of Health spokesman said the report covered patients diagnosed between 1990 and 1994.

"Since that time, cancer survival rates in England have been steadily improving for but we accept that there is further work to do to reduce the gap between us and the rest of northern and western Europe and America."

Algeria, the only African country involved, came bottom in all types of cancer.

Survival

It meant an American man was four times more likely to survive prostate cancer than an Algerian, while a Japanese man was six times more likely to survive colon cancer.

Poland, Slovenia, Brazil and Estonia had survival rates half as good as the best performers.

The results closely mirrored the amount each country was spending on health during the period.

While the US led the way with more than 13% of gross domestic product spent on health, Canada, Australia and the best-performing European nations were all spending about 9% to 10%.

The UK was spending just over 7% but that figure has now been increased following record rises in the NHS budget to bring it much closer to the likes of France and Germany.

Algeria was spending around 4%.

The importance of money was further illustrated by an ethnic breakdown of outcomes in the US.

White Americans, who are on the whole wealthier and therefore more able to afford the insurance which underpins the US system, were up to 14% more likely than others to survive cancer.

Professor Coleman said some of the differences could be attributed to variations in "access to diagnostic and treatment services".

"This, of course, is associated with the amount of investment in technology such as CT scanners."

Dr Lesley Walker, Cancer Research UK's director of cancer information, added: "The report is the first major study to compare cancer survival across five continents and has highlighted the stark differences in survival between poor and wealthy countries."

Where has this broad been?
 
Top Bottom