Recently in Health Care Category

*(Be sure to give us your opinion at the end of this post!)

Problems with defining what is uninsured

During the Clinton administration, proponents of universal health care created a compelling sense of urgency by citing a government statistic that said 40 million Americans lack health insurance for at least one year. Proponents called them "persistently uninsured." The National Coalition on Health Care reports that the 2007 figure is up to almost 47 million American.

But -- in 2004, the Congressional Budget Office reported that the correct figure (as of 2004) was really 21 to 31 million, a correction of almost 110% downward:

In recent years, it has been frequently stated that about 40 million Americans lack health insurance coverage. That estimate, by itself, presents an incomplete and potentially misleading picture of the uninsured population. The uninsured population is constantly changing as people gain coverage and lose coverage. Furthermore, people vary greatly in the length of time that they remain uninsured. Some people are uninsured for long periods of time, but more are uninsured for shorter periods. (CBO Testimony before the Subcommittee on Health Committee on Ways and Means U.S. House of Representatives, March 9, 2004).

Shifting the focus to the UNDER-insured

Because of problems with defining what it means to be uninsured, experts have shifted the focus to looking at the UNDER-insured.

Gratifyingly, readers of this blog have responded with some great comments to the post Are We Smarter & Better than the British on National Health Care . . . ?

Thank you! Keep them coming, and please take the poll located at the end of this post -- thanks again!

If you're like you me, a normal everyday intelligent but non-expert person, you probably find the issues surrounding health care to be wide, large, complicated, confusing, and -- last but not least -- highly, seriously, contentious (and for good and obvious reasons):

First see: Michael Moore attacks Dr. Sanjay Gupta's Criticism of SICKO.
Then see: Dr. Sanjay Gupta's response to Michael Moore.
Finally, check out the debate between these two men on Larry King Live.

You don't have to be an health care expert to see that the current system is rife with problems (problems that are even more grave than "too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country").

While I think the "solution" is harder to see, others think the answer is more or less straightforward, i.e.,  more government involvement and control . . . 

But is that solution really so clear?

Liberal Values makes good start in defending Democratic health care plans against a slew of conservative bloggers, but -- it doesn't go far enough. It's start, but that's all it is.

I'm sure the post is correct that there are significant differences between the British & Canadian plans and the plans advocated by Democratic candidates.

But this raises a host of troubling questions: