WebMd's professional-level Medscape site published a pair of articles last week — Single-Payer System: Why It Would Save US Healthcare and Single-Payer System: Why It Would Ruin US Healthcare— that are interesting (perhaps especially in the reader comments posted at each) for how professionals in the healthcare and medical industries see the question.
In the articles and comments, the Canadian system and some others in the world are referred to or mentioned, also Medicare, the Veterans' Administration, Vermont's re-evaluation, Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP), the ACA and so on, although, oddly, no mention that I found of the Hawaiian system.
Use of Medscape is free, you just have to register. I've been reading there for many years now, initially as a professional research librarian, and have found it a very useful resource personally as well. Here's my usual intro and 'disclaimer' links:
| MEDSCAPE is a mostly-plain-English news/research-reportage/reference service geared for healthcare professionals but FREE to all who register - "Consumer" is among the PROFESSIONS listed in the registration process that starts when you first click on a Medscape link..
Picking multiple topics for email notification may flood your inbox, since a tremendous number of medical journals worldwide contribute articles to Medscape, so it's a good idea to start with few or just one notification topic, and see how it goes (or none, if you prefer access without emails). Many Medscape articles are commentable - if you use a screen-name for privacy, it's worth devising one that won't undermine the impact of your comments. Articles with videos of speakers provide a transcript below the vid window. Click sound off if you'd rather just read. Some articles are slideshows or quizes with accompanying text. Keep in mind that the competitive nature of publishing can skew writing in any venue to suggest certainties not fully supported by data: ■ "Many Studies Have 'Elementary Statistical Errors'"■ It Ain't Necessarily So: Why Much of the Medical Literature Is Wrong■ Data Re-analysis Changes 35% of Trial Conclusions■ Published trial reports contain less than half of the patient-outcomes data contained in company-controlled documents (October 2013, PLoS). ■ Pressure to Publish Lead[s] to Scientific Misconduct. Separately see research resources: ■ PubMed Central including fulltext ■ PubMed ■ MEDLINE PLUS (WIKIPEDIA descr.) ■ Medline ■ and other authoritative resources. Medical science, like every realm of human endeavor, is work in progress. Read critically for best results. |