Sunday, March 02, 2008

Medical Patents and Costs of Healthcare

In the post from yesterday, I linked the pages from the WHO Report that everyone cites about universal healthcare and I was challenged because it only lists patents received into the US patent office. That was the standard set by the WHO, not by me. Damn, I had no clue that we had to cherry-pick the information to accomplish ONLY the standards of the Leftists. That kinda slows my complete and total debunking of the report. Only pick the stats that say our healthcare is bad and the stats that say universal healthcare is good. What kind of standards are those? Either we use the report or we do not. Simple.

Today I have been researching the patents approved by the World Intellectual Property Organization and medical stats are hard to find. This standard is NOT used in the WHO report, but of course this the type of information the Lefty wants to use because the standards already set completely dismantle his argument FOR universal healthcare in this country.

So far, this is what I know, these stats are NOT just medical patents, they are TOTAL patents.

Germany leads the world in total patents applied for, of course, Germany was the only country to join WIPO for the first three years. 6,090 patents. 82,400,996 population.

France comes in second with 3,930 patents and second country to join. 64,473,140 population.

The US is third, but has only been in for four years while France has been in for nine. Yes, it takes years for the patents to wind their way through the system. 3,741 patents. 301,139,947 population. Remember, 48% of our population voted for Kerry, so you have to take those people out of the number of folks capable of inventing anything. Also, our population has moved mainly into the major cities that have virtually NO research facilities.

Point in case, Pfizer which is the largest drug manufacturer in the world, is based in New York City. ALL of their US research facilities are in districts that voted for Bush, except for the main Ann Arbor facility. Even the area of St. Louis where they have an R&D center voted for Bush, which is stunning. Yes, that took some time and sent me w-a-y over my time restriction spent researching a topic.

China is seventh. The UK is eighth. The twenty-seven countries in the EU applied for 26,026 patents in 2007. The population of the EU is 490,430,321 of course, they would have ALL voted for Kerry because they are friggin' stupid.

Remember, population is a big factor here, I ain't about to do the math on this because it is uninteresting to me because by my constitution, I am an individualist that believes in LESS government intervention in my life. At some point, I will parse this list to include only medical stuff, it will take me a while, IF I get motivated to do it. There are a bunch of factors to include, number of medical research facilities, which I would assume would be much higher in the US because we do not have universal healthcare and therefore spend probably fifty times the amount as, say France, on research. 2005-US, 95 billion. 2005-France, 5.2 billion. Whoops, I missed that one, it's only eighteen times and more than half of their money came from US companies. Take that money out and it is still less than fifty times but really close.

Also, our standards are much higher for patents to be given because of the safety factors in place because we do not have universal healthcare which has been proven to reduce quality. I do think that our government stifles that research because of the much higher standards and taxation of medical facilities and drug companies.

Just think, do away with all taxes on drug companies and medical facilities, they would go crazy with innovations in medicine, but shit no, we can't do that, then those BIG CORPORATIONS might make a PROFIT! Y'all on the Left are just so sand-poundingly stupid. Profit has always been and shall always be good. Profit is the driving force for ALL innovation. How many inventions do you think were produced in Cuba, where the whole concept is based on the collective? They probably did invent edible tires, so they wouldn't starve to death.

Here's one little other tidbit, that no one will tell you regarding the so-called universal healthcare programs, in the US, almost 45% of our population's healthcare is covered by the government. In the UK, 85.7% is covered, France, 76.3%, Canada, 69.9%, Germany, 78.2%. Let's compare apples to apples for a change, and see what those costs really represent.

Pick a country, Canada, okay. Understand that 97% of research in Canada is funded privately and those costs are NOT included in the WHO report, this just shows individual medical care, I cannot find the total numbers broken down because I am too lazy. Population 33,390,141. Total people covered: around 23,500,000. Total expenditures per person from the government: $2,669.00 per person a DAMN YEAR!

My family insurance cost me $1044.00 per person, just to offer a reference. That is less than half.

Versus the United States: 45%-135.5 million people covered. 57% of our research is privately funded and the National Institutes of Health offers 28%. Both of these numbers are added to our total cost of heathcare in the WHO report, and that makes no damn sense at all. Make of that what you will. It becomes ever more increasingly noticable that our costs per person are only a fraction of the countries that are "covered" by universal healthcare.

Don't worry though, since 48% of our population was stupid enough to vote for Kerry and appear set to vote for Barry, I feel certain that we can lower our standards soon enough where we can reach the substandard level of care that is practiced in Cuba or the Sudan. There is always hope.

Please take the time to comment.

Also, remember that I ONLY use Wikipedia to debunk the Left's claims. They produce the information and I use it to tear down their argument using only their argument. I also understand that there is very little chance that I will ever convince the Left that universal healthcare is bad, they want me to pay for their stuff because they do not have the intelligence and ambition to EARN it on their own. 'Nuff said?


ChristinaJade said...

my brother is a doctor, and he will be the first one to tell you that when the government is involved in healthcare, the quality of the treatment greatly decreases as the red tape increases. let's face it, if you know a local doctor has medical card recipients as 75% of his patients, are you likely to choose that doctor? NO. my baby bro is also one of those doctors that will NOT take patient without insurance. why? his payment is guaranteed. no doubt about it. which is why he just bought his wife a new escalade for Christmas to replace the one she got a year and a half ago.

taking away the taxes is a nifty idea. setting a standard for insurance costs is another. i am not fond of insurance companies. even though there are several different companies, there is no competition. they don't try to be cheaper than the next guy to bring in business, they all seem to work together as a collective to keep rates high so they can enjoy their golf outings and around the planet bonus trips. if you ask me, they are the ones responsible for the rising costs of healthcare. why? they don't argue with the healthcare provider about cost, but they sure will deny a claim by a patient.

example-say you're making fried pork rinds for a living. you know, because there are several companies who specialize in buying pork rinds that you're going to get paid no matter what you charge. aren't you going to up your prices to make more money? of course. when someone offers a product that people think they can't live without, like fried pork rinds (or "traditional" medical care) they are going to be able to charge whatever they want, because it is a must-have product. i'll shut up now. i really want some pork rinds.