prostate cancer new treatment
prostate cancer new treatment questions and answers
All the information you need about prostate cancer new treatment Check out CheckTheProstate.com For all your Prostate Cancer Questions & Answers
Q: Dramatic results from new prostate cancer treatment?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090619152128.htm
A: Sounds encouraging. But one should remember that two patients are not enough to assess the overall efficacy of this new treatment. In recent years specific antibody therapy (various "mabs") have demonstrated efficacy in several types of cancer. Lets hope that this will also be the case with prostate cancer.
Q: where is the best place in new york state for treatment of prostate cancer?
A: I am not sure specifically about prostate, but overall Memorial Sloan Kettering Medical Center in NYC is considered the best cacner hospital in New York. Check this site out:
http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/403.cfm
Good luck!
Q: Are there newer treatments for prostate & bladder cancer for older people.?
My grandfather has prostate cancer that has spread to the lung and eventually the bladder. He was going through chemotherapy and radiation successfully until they discovered the bladder cancer. His doctor said if he was younger that he would try surgery but that isn't an option because of his age.
I was curious about robotic surgery and found this article from 5 years ago:
http://www.fightprostatecancer.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5651
The guy in the article was 86 years old and weak with a heart that was pumping at only 5% the strength of a healthy heart. I am curious if there is anything even better after 5 years that can be used for prostate and bladder surgery.
A: Prostate Cancer in it's early stage (confined to the Prostate Gland) can be successfully treated with surgery, including Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy. When the cancer has spread to other areas of the body (metastasis) surgery to remove the Prostate is ineffective, because surgery does not remove all the cancer. In late stage Prostate Cancer common treatments would include Radiation along with Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) or Chemotherapy to slow the spread of the disease. It sounds like your Grandfather has a good Doctor who is taking care of him with the best treatments available right now. With treatment, men with late stage Prostate Cancer can survive for several years. Sorry to hear of your Grandfathers diagnosis, continue to support him with your encouragement and continued education about Prostate Cancer and available treatments.
Q: cancer treatments in Western Washington State?
Need information on new treatments for Prostate Cancer
A: I recommend you join the "newly diagnosed" mailing list at UsToo:
http://www.prostatepointers.org/mlist/mlist.html
You should be able to find people in your area who have had to face this problem.
Q: New evidence for cancer cure is kill the cancer stem cell?
Evidence keeps growing that to cure cancer, you must kill off the cancer stem cell. For the last 30-40 years, cancer treatment has focused on just the cancer cell, and not the cancer stem cell. This is like killing the weed plant you see above ground and leaving the root behind. The root will regrow the weed, just like the cancer stem cell will regrow the cancer cells.
Now, Tykerb has been shown to kill off breast cancer stem cells in some types of breast cancer, Parthenolide/DMAPT kills AML (leukemia) stem cells and other cancer stem cells, GRN163L kills myeloma stem cells. Cyclopamine and the new water soluble version kill prostate cancer stem cells and myeloma stem cells. Clinical trials to start soon. So, will this finally lead to some cancer cures? I await the evidence.
A: Very interesting. But if you have terminal cancer and are out of options are you going to wait years for the trials to be completed. You would likely try something that is available now.
I TRIED THIS AND IT WORKED.
http://www.geocities.com/cure.cancer/how_to_cure_cancer_with_ginger.html
Q: A family friend has secondary cancer and has refused treatment!?
He had prostate cancer and was treated 6 years ago, it came back his blood tests showed a high level of indicator [sorry can't remember its name]. He is in his 70's and found his initial chemo debilitating. He decided not to have a second course. He is still alive and pretty much living a normal life! If you have secondary's is it better to have treatment or take the gamble? Obviously in his case it paid off, My Mum died within months from having treatment for secondary's and suffered alot. What is your experience. Please let me know as I have a 1 in 8 chance of suffering the same fate. Mum had primary ovarian cancer and whilst being treated for secondary's she developed primary Breast cancer unrelated to the Ovarian cancer. It was questioned had the chemo caused cell damage causing the new second cancer. Thanks and God Bless anybody being treated right now. xxx
Texas T please tell me more!
A: I have had chemo. and I have to say its pretty traumatic. I fortunately didn't lose my hair but I felt very sick and extremely exhausted. Unfortunately as I have secondaries in my lungs I have to start a new course of chemo in the new year. I was 48 when diagnosed and had two very long complicated operations. They gave me 6-12 months. Here I am over two years later and although I am now 50, I still feel young and my kids are in their early twenties and still living at home. I have a wonderfully supportive husband and fantastic friends and I WANT TO LIVE. If I was your friends age I may feel differently and think, well I've lived my life, what will be will be. But I feel for myself that I should grasp ANY opportunity to prolong my life. My doctors are THE best anyone could wish for and are very encouraging. As much as I DONT want the chemo, I definitely DONT want the alternative.
Where theres life theres hope and I am hoping some miracle cure will come and it won't be too late for me.
Take no notice of any 'miracle' cures that are on the web, believe me, my doctors know of NO miracles yet.
I'm told to keep positive, live my life as best as I can and try to live each day as if its my last.
Hopefully I'll live to see my second child graduate in 2008 and to see both kids settled down with partners with kids of their own. That alone makes me battle on.
But everyone is different and the choice has to be a personal one.
I hope anyone out there who has cancer and reads this, the very best of luck with their treatments and look forward to a happy 2007.
xxxxxxx
Q: Will Provenge be approved on or before May 15 by the FDA?
Provenge, manufactured by Dendreon Corporation, is a new treatment for prostate cancer. It is the first drug/treatment that is considered a vaccine. Instead of killing cells (bad AND good) like chemo, it actually augments the immune system by training white 'killer t-cells' to attack the cancer. In clinical trials Provenge tripled the chances of a man surviving past 3 years. It also had a median survival advantage of 4.5 months for men whose average life expectancy at this late stage of prostate cancer is approximately 22 months. Side effects are only flu-like symptoms that last for 2-3 days.
A: I haven't heard anything in over a month. I do know it's on the fast-track (which can be good and bad) and is in review to begin promotion. Promotion approval means it will be approved very soon.
Just watch the FDA or Dendreon websites.
http://www.prostate-cancer.org/advocacy/ProvengeFDAReview.html
http://www.fda.org
http://www.dendreon.com/index.php?flash=true
Q: Prostate Cancer and Bone Scan?
Hello,
My dad has recently been diagnosted with prostate cancer.
He is a proud man, and doesnt want to "bother" anyone with his health issues, so at times I think that I am getting the sugar coated version.
Both times that he went for a biopsy, he got a blood infection. Has this happened to anyone else, and is this a regular occurance?? His doctor had him go in for a bone scan, I asked an aunt of mine, who was a nurse many years ago (30+) and she said that generally when they want a bone scan the cancer quite far along. Do doctors generally request a bone scan as a precaution or what?
The doctor told my dad that he will be going for radiation treatment for 6 weeks straight, every day. I was wondering what things I should expect...
This is all new to me, and any other questions I should ask the doctors when I fly in to be with my dad I would really appreciate!!
A: My doctor routinely sends his biopsy positive patients for bone scans. I had a Gleason score of 6, which means my cancer was in its early stages. My Doc wanted the scan just to be: a) thorough and b) establish a baseline for anything later. The bone scan was negative, as was expected.
I had the choice of surgery or radiation - I chose surgery. Some guys prefer the radiation - there are advantages and disadvantages to each.
Don't assume the worst!! Important terms that you should Google would be Gleason scores,cancer stages, and PSA. (these are easy to find - I won't waste time here) Read those terms, then ask your Dad some intelligent questions like, What was your Gleason Score? What was your PSA acceleration?
Q: Cancer and antiangiogenesis via progesterone:?
It is known that both estrogen and testosterone induce formation of new arteries into cancers, just as estrogen induces formation of arteries into the epithelial tissues of the uterus.
We also know that progesterone causes the closing off of those arteries in epithelial tissue at the time of menstruation, causing the epithelial tissue to die and slough off.
When men with prostate cancer have used progesterone cream, they have reported sharp reduction or even cessation of bone pain from metastatic prostate cancer.
Would this suggest that progesterone may, at least in these cases, be acting as an antiangiogenesis agent, causing the cancer to be starved of blood, so starved of food and oxygen?
If so, would it be at all safe to use this while waiting for treatment? How would one know what would be safe or effective dosage?
My doctor, my oncologist acknowledge having heard of use of progesterone treatments, but because they are not part of standard protocols they refuse to discuss.
Antiangiogenesis drugs have been tested and are part of protocols for other cancers, but they will not discuss other than for those in approved drug testing program.
Doctors appear to be the major block in information flow. I am starting to distrust their objectives.
A: There are clinical trials showing benefit of progesterone analogs (medroxyprogesterone acetate) in metastatic prostate cancer. I don't know your stage, so not sure what "waiting for treatment" means, but may be reasonable to use these drugs in your case. Don;t be too distrustful of your doc depending on your specific situation, there may be no data showing benefit, in which case most patients do not want to be a "guinea pig." Talk with your doc and discuss why he does not want to use those drugs- there may be a very good reason.
Q: Prostate medicine?
Last night while half-asleep, I heard on the radio a mention of a new medicine called (and I'm spelling it phonetically here) 'abarataron,' which is supposed to have very good results in the treatment of prostate problems including cancer in the early to intermediate stages.
I just google-searched the word and nothing came-up; obviously, I have not spelled it correctly. Do any other middle-aged Yahoo-ers like me have any info about this medicine or similar?
A: abarataron,
I have osteosarcoma and believe the drug you mentioned is a biological or closely related and CollaGenex Pharmaceuticals has it's patent and Res&Dev but need more info, ask your PCP or Oncologist to research if he doesn't already have literature on it. He or she will be glad to dispell any myths or misconception if they are a good practitioner.
ISM
Q: Provenge....is it worth it?
I was just reading where the FDA had approved a new drug for Prostate cancer called Provenge. They say this drug increases a stage 3 type persons life an additional 4 1/2 months. When I read, this I was like, whats the point in taking it if it's only going to extend your life by 4 months??? Give me 5 or 10 years or even more, then I can see it being substancial type of treatment.
A: When doing clinical tests on new drugs for cancers which already have a standard cure regimen, it is standard to test it on the 'desperate cases', ie on people on which other drugs wont work. If they do work on those people, it is a clue that they are more efficient and could have an advantage over the standard treatment, in lower stage cases.
So basically that means that Provenge might lenghten a stage 3's life by 4 1/2 months, but might give the additional 5-10 years to a stage 2 for example.
Q: What's gone wrong with our priorities? No money to save lives, but plenty to bribe asylum seekers?
Today's paper carried details of the lavish amounts of money spent on bribing failed asylum seekers to return home and to set them up in business. It also revealed that a highly effective treatment for curing prostate cancer will be denied to most sufferers on the NHS because of lack of funding. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/16/ncancer116.xml&DCMP=EMC-new_16122007
Why is our government so generous to foreigners and so mean to the unfortunate at home? As prostate cancer is a disease of middle age, one can assume that most beneficiaries will be people who have paid into our system. Where is the justice in all this?
A: What we are witnessing with Labour, is one of the biggest con-tricks of all time. The Labour Party has always had a blind spot when it comes to who pays their wages. They treat the electorate with contempt and arrogance. To bribe illegal immigrants to leave the country whilst denying the indigenous population funds to treat life threatening illnesses, is beyond perverse.
This Government is made up of appeasers and apologists. Weak and timid people who think that if they suck up to the bullies, they won't hurt them. Makes one feel sick.
Prostrate cancer will not figure high on this feminist Governments agenda. It only affects men.
There are over 500 charities that work with breast cancer and 1, yes, that's right, 1 charity that works to eradicate prostrate cancer. It's income is less than 1% of what breast cancer charities get.
The only good news on the horizon is that this incompetent shambles of government couldn't tell the time in a room full of clocks. They are lurching from one crisis to another. Gordon Brown is looking older by the day!.
Q: 10 Reasons Why American Healthcare Is Better Than You've Been Told - How do you feel about obama's?
"Health Care" Program?
Saturday, August 01, 2009
10 Reasons Why American Healthcare Is Better Than You've Been Told
By Jonah Goldberg
From Hoover's Scott Atlas (who's also the head of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical School:
1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers. Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.
2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians. Breast cancer mortality in Canada is 9 percent higher than in the United States, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher, and colon cancer among men is about 10 percent higher.
3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries. Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit from statin drugs, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease, are taking them. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons, and 17 percent of Italians receive them.
4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians. Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate, and colon cancer:
Nine out of ten middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to fewer than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a Pap smear, compared to fewer than 90 percent of Canadians.
More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a prostatespecific antigen (PSA) test, compared to fewer than one in six Canadians (16 percent).
Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with fewer than one in twenty Canadians (5 percent).
5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report “excellent” health (11.7 percent) compared to Canadian seniors (5.8 percent). Conversely, white, young Canadian adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower-income Americans to describe their health as “fair or poor.”
6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long—sometimes more than a year—to see a specialist, have elective surgery such as hip replacements, or get radiation treatment for cancer. All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada. In Britain, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.
7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, and British adults say their health system needs either “fundamental change” or “complete rebuilding.”
8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the “health care system,” more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared with only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).
9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain. An overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identify computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade—even as economists and policy makers unfamiliar with actual medical practice decry these techniques as wasteful. The United States has thirty-four CT scanners per million Americans, compared to twelve in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has almost twenty-seven MRI machines per million people compared to about six per million in Canada and Britain.
10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations. The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other developed country. Since the mid- 1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to U.S. residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined. In only five of the past thirty-four years did a scientist living in the United States not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.
Despite serious challenges, such a
A: The obama's should move to Kenya and fix that place. Get all of America/Americans out of their claws.
Q: How can all these liberals think health care is so great around the world?
Dont they read? DOnt they travel? I guess if you live in public housing, you dont get to travel much. I guess if you are told you have to swallow the pied pipers claims book line and sinker you gotta do what you gotta do or he wont pay you for your vote next time.
1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers. Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.
2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians. Breast cancer mortality in Canada is 9 percent higher than in the United States, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher, and colon cancer among men is about 10 percent higher.
3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries. Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit from statin drugs, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease, are taking them. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons, and 17 percent of Italians receive them.
4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians. Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate, and colon cancer:
* Nine out of ten middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to fewer than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
* Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a Pap smear, compared to fewer than 90 percent of Canadians.
* More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a prostatespecific antigen (PSA) test, compared to fewer than one in six Canadians (16 percent).
* Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with fewer than one in twenty Canadians (5 percent).
5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report “excellent” health (11.7 percent) compared to Canadian seniors (5.8 percent). Conversely, white, young Canadian adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower-income Americans to describe their health as “fair or poor.”
6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long—sometimes more than a year—to see a specialist, have elective surgery such as hip replacements, or get radiation treatment for cancer. All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada. In Britain, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.
7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, and British adults say their health system needs either “fundamental change” or “complete rebuilding.”
8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the “health care system,” more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared with only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).
9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain. An overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identify computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade—even as economists and policy makers unfamiliar with actual medical practice decry these techniques as wasteful. The United States has thirty-four CT scanners per million Americans, compared to twelve in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has almost twenty-seven MRI machines per million people compared to about six per million in Canada and Britain.
10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations. The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other developed country. Since the mid- 1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to U.S. residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined. In only five of the past thirty-four years did a scientist living in the United States not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.
(http://www.hoov
you gotta love dullards that think "everything you say is just wrong" passes for debate. My My you are a democrat
No what is funny is democrats had total control of the congress 52 years since 1933 and republicans had 17. Yet democrats blame everything on republicans despite them having power 3 times as much!
again jenny is wrong. every post she does that! THe fact is that every nations people DO trade it, every single day! They fly across the world to the US to get the best healthcare on the planet. ISnt it odd that every single rich person that gets really sick comes to the US? did you ever think to ask why?
ad as for #6 and dustbin the fact is I used to work for WHO. THey rank health care based on the difference between the rich health care and the poor health care. If you give everyone a bandaid for a heart attack, according to them, you have great health care. Yea, you are geniuses!
WHy yes green. I had a compound fracture of my lower leg in germany. Id say that means I do have first hand experience.
jenny its not just hte rich that have great health care. IM not rich and mine is better than anyone in europe or australia gets. I had a seizure one time 3 years ago. I went to the hospital and was given my choice of which kind of MRI I wanted right then, not 3 weeks later. I opted for the open one and got it then.
Wow whining that a cancer survivor files bankruptcy? So you get to keep your car, your house... and your life. I guess you are right. ITs better to be dead.
Mr bad you are correct! My link was incomplete. accept my apologies and my link
http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/49525427.html
Mr bad because it is. I lived in seattle and they actually have waits for non emergency health care exactly because of the burden of canadians. BUT it has been mitigated by simply more drs per capita moving there. See that is the great thing about real health care is you have flexibility
NO jenny. REmember Natasha richardson? SHe was rich. SHe fell down and hit her head. She thought she was OK> A few hours later she started passing out. They rushed her to the hospital where they DID NOT even give her a ct scan. After all they needed to get approval and there was the matter of cost... well anyway since they saved $392 she died of bleeding on the brain. A ct scan would have shown that and a quick drainage hole would have saved her life.. but look at the bright side, they saved $392! I hope that helped canada recover.
Con man the only difference is if my insurance company screws me, I can sue them. If obama care screws you you are expressly forbidden from any remedies. YOU are not allowed to sue them. You should just go take advantage of some of their end of life suicide seminars.....
Very good momma!
>If your country's health care system is so great, why are Americans, going to India, Thailand, Mexico, etc., for health care? http://www.alternet.org/workplace/98045/…
BEcause when they go it makes the news. when people come here it doesnt. alternet? yes a well known news source.
Why do so many from Canada and Great Britain come on here and say they wouldn't trade theirs for ours at gunpoint?
A combination of pride and ignorance.
>Most Canadians are able to come here for care only because the Canadian government pays the bills.
Yes, because even the canadian supreme court says the health care system kills its subscribers.
Why do so many Americans die from lack of health care every year? 136,000 died from 2000 to 2006. http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/tal…
which is zero percentage wise compared to canada. Here you go. about 1000 people had sars in canada. 49 died. about 1000 people had sars in the US. ONE died
Really momma? the fact that .00001% of americans go over seas for health care versus what? 20% go from canada doesnt seem like there is a difference? Maybe you should go to a good 3rd grade math class
Really momma? the fact that .00001% of americans go over seas for health care versus what? 20% go from canada doesnt seem like there is a difference? Maybe you should go to a good 3rd grade math class
see brittanys dumb ass, I posted a link to the numbers, proving that only you are stupid.
A: Great post! They say it works because they have no idea what they are talking about; they repeat what people from those countries say. People in those countries say it works because it's all they've ever known.
Q: Why do liberals want to trash health care?
The fact is that using every single metric, the US has the best health care on the planet.
1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers. Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.
2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians. Breast cancer mortality in Canada is 9 percent higher than in the United States, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher, and colon cancer among men is about 10 percent higher.
3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries. Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit from statin drugs, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease, are taking them. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons, and 17 percent of Italians receive them.
4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians. Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate, and colon cancer:
* Nine out of ten middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to fewer than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
* Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a Pap smear, compared to fewer than 90 percent of Canadians.
* More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a prostatespecific antigen (PSA) test, compared to fewer than one in six Canadians (16 percent).
* Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with fewer than one in twenty Canadians (5 percent).
5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report “excellent” health (11.7 percent) compared to Canadian seniors (5.8 percent). Conversely, white, young Canadian adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower-income Americans to describe their health as “fair or poor.”
6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long—sometimes more than a year—to see a specialist, have elective surgery such as hip replacements, or get radiation treatment for cancer. All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada. In Britain, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.
7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, and British adults say their health system needs either “fundamental change” or “complete rebuilding.”
8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the “health care system,” more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared with only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).
9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain. An overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identify computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade—even as economists and policy makers unfamiliar with actual medical practice decry these techniques as wasteful. The United States has thirty-four CT scanners per million Americans, compared to twelve in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has almost twenty-seven MRI machines per million people compared to about six per million in Canada and Britain.
10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations. The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other developed country. Since the mid- 1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to U.S. residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined. In only five of the past thirty-four years did a scientist living in the United States not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.
http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/49525427.html
See that link on the bottom of the article canadian? Most americans are smart enough to follow the link when they need to verify the info.
How dumb can you butt monkeys be? See the "additional details"? See the link under it? COULD you 2 clowns be any lamer?
And some people are so dumb they compare average life expectancy. You do realize that includes car accidents, murders, as well as premature deaths that occur naturally dont you? I mean you cant be that stupid can you? Ok so that includes 40 million illegals that may have never seen a doctor in their lives as well as the 12000 mostly teenagers that shoot themselves fighting for drug turf. I mean you do realize that dont you? Ok so add in the number 12000 18 - 25 year olds (mostly) and lets see, do you think that might skew the numbers? Are you people really all that stupid?
and endo, only a dumb butt monkey would disagree with such a well written article that went into such detail and cited with.... um.... nothing. GOod job.
nice question tada. "ranked 37th in the world" Despite your lack of citing WHO ranked it (a common mistake amongst those that want to use discredited numbers) I do realize it is the UN or the WHO that did it. Having worked for the WHO I know how they do their rankings. They compare the health care that the richest person gets to the care the poorest person gets. The closer they are to identical, the higher you rank. So if you wanted to hand out bandaids and peroxide for compound fractures, and did that for everyone, you would rank #1. See why people laugh at these organizations run by 3rd worlders? The fact is that anyone with a dime on the planet, when they get seriously ill, flees to the US for medical care.
ok mewto lets compare the SARS outbreak of a few years back. both the US and canada had about 1000 cases of SARS. IN canada 49 people died. In the US ONE 70+ year old died. Id say that makes US health care better for infectious diseases too!
Tada you want to hear horror stories? IF your insurance company turns you down you can sue the crap out of them. If you are turned down by obama care, you cant do a thing. ITs written right in the obama care law.
A: Wow this one is going to be easy. All I need to do is post something that isnt full of liberal BS and contorted facts and I get the best answer award! Thanks for the 10!
Ok the reason is the federal govt doesnt give a shit about health care. it is just another way to extort more money from americans and use it to hand out to the lazy that vote democrat. THey can actually give a raise to liberals that vote for them that way. I mean $3 TRILLION more dollars per year for hand outs? JACKPOT! Heres a clue. if you want something how about earning it? Has that idea ever crossed a democrats mind?