Anonymous wrote:Agree with PP. I think its cruel and unnecessary, and I probably think a little less of you privately. But I have bigger things to worry about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one said anything about lower rates of circumcision in Europe being a result of socialized medicine. Please read more carefully next time and without such emotion. The question is, are European studies also biased by economics in the setting of more widespread socialized medicine?

How would you imagine such bias to come into the picture, if not in order to keep circumcision rates down so the system doesn't have to pay for it, an allegation that I addressed in my post? Your question doesn't make sense. Also, name the other countries that have government-run healthcare like the UK does. Because most don't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one said anything about lower rates of circumcision in Europe being a result of socialized medicine. Please read more carefully next time and without such emotion. The question is, are European studies also biased by economics in the setting of more widespread socialized medicine?

How would you imagine such bias to come into the picture, if not in order to keep circumcision rates down so the system doesn't have to pay for it, an allegation that I addressed in my post? Your question doesn't make sense. Also, name the other countries that have government-run healthcare like the UK does. Because most don't.

Anonymous wrote:Way way way off topic. Please start your own thread.

Anonymous wrote:No one said anything about lower rates of circumcision in Europe being a result of socialized medicine. Please read more carefully next time and without such emotion. The question is, are European studies also biased by economics in the setting of more widespread socialized medicine?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the odds that European studies and procedures are affected by financial aspects as well? There are multiple socialized systems over there where care is rationed based on availability of medical doctors in a particular field and cost/benefit ratio analysis. Maybe all studies need to be taken with a grain of skepticism.

Strange that you would say that. Perhaps you should look at other studies in Europe that relate to elective procedures. Fertility is a good one. Do you suggest that European health care is not at the leading edge of fertility treatment because they may be trying to keep costs down? If that's the case how is it that IVF was pioneered in the UK?

Americans almost universally misunderstand how health care works in Europe. It would not be called "socialized" by almost anyone who lives there. Most Americans also misunderstand or mischaracterize how health care works in the US. For example, health care rationing occurs frequently in the US, with Medicaid or insurance companies calling the shots - or simply health care is rationed through ability to pay.

I am intimately familiar with health care both here and in Europe (particularly the UK). And I would choose the US for any sort of major health care issue. This is not even a little bit of a debate. Anyone who believes otherwise is very suspect in my mind.

pp here. I have spent almost 25 years in the UK and 15 years here. I suspect that I am a lot more familiar with both than you are, but certainly with the UK. This isn't the place for a debate on the pros and cons of each system, but I will tell you hands down that I would pick the UK for my health care. I had a major accident as a teen and the care was first rate and there was no quibbling with insurance companies or problems with lack of coordination of care or in fact any bills. My surgeon was amazing and he spent 5 hours of complex surgery to reassemble my broken limbs - now it's difficult to tell I even had an accident. My brother had a major accident as a young adult and was on a ventilator for a few days, very seriously ill. Again, amazing care in the hospital and follow up and all without a single bill. I had routine surgery as a young adult and then the same surgery a decade later in the US and still I'd pick the UK over my US experience (though my US experience was fine, just in the UK there were no insurance hassles). My father recently had a knee replacement in the UK. The waiting time for surgery was less than it took for my husband to get an appointment with an orthopedist here in the UK. His follow up treatment has also been excellent. There may be an illusion of "choice" here but the reality is that it often takes just as long to get an appointment, it's much more expensive and the care is no better (evidenced by outcomes research) particularly if you look at the population as a whole.

Government payor = socialized medicine. There is no getting around that. Sounds like part of what you love about the UK system is that you did not have to deal with a third party payor.

When dealing with some of the socialized systems, certain treatments are not provided to those who are too ill or too old. That is a fact. Its called rationing.

Yes, insurance companies to have a say here in what treatments they will pay for. However, if you are in the hospital and need a specific treatment that is deemed necessary by your health care provider, you will get it, even if your insurance company won't pay.

So yes, I do wonder European or American, if some studies are swayed by the background economic culture. There are many here who say the European studies are better than the American ones because the American ones are swayed by economics. Who can say for sure that they both are not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the odds that European studies and procedures are affected by financial aspects as well? There are multiple socialized systems over there where care is rationed based on availability of medical doctors in a particular field and cost/benefit ratio analysis. Maybe all studies need to be taken with a grain of skepticism.

Strange that you would say that. Perhaps you should look at other studies in Europe that relate to elective procedures. Fertility is a good one. Do you suggest that European health care is not at the leading edge of fertility treatment because they may be trying to keep costs down? If that's the case how is it that IVF was pioneered in the UK?

Americans almost universally misunderstand how health care works in Europe. It would not be called "socialized" by almost anyone who lives there. Most Americans also misunderstand or mischaracterize how health care works in the US. For example, health care rationing occurs frequently in the US, with Medicaid or insurance companies calling the shots - or simply health care is rationed through ability to pay.

I am intimately familiar with health care both here and in Europe (particularly the UK). And I would choose the US for any sort of major health care issue. This is not even a little bit of a debate. Anyone who believes otherwise is very suspect in my mind.

pp here. I have spent almost 25 years in the UK and 15 years here. I suspect that I am a lot more familiar with both than you are, but certainly with the UK. This isn't the place for a debate on the pros and cons of each system, but I will tell you hands down that I would pick the UK for my health care. I had a major accident as a teen and the care was first rate and there was no quibbling with insurance companies or problems with lack of coordination of care or in fact any bills. My surgeon was amazing and he spent 5 hours of complex surgery to reassemble my broken limbs - now it's difficult to tell I even had an accident. My brother had a major accident as a young adult and was on a ventilator for a few days, very seriously ill. Again, amazing care in the hospital and follow up and all without a single bill. I had routine surgery as a young adult and then the same surgery a decade later in the US and still I'd pick the UK over my US experience (though my US experience was fine, just in the UK there were no insurance hassles). My father recently had a knee replacement in the UK. The waiting time for surgery was less than it took for my husband to get an appointment with an orthopedist here in the UK. His follow up treatment has also been excellent. There may be an illusion of "choice" here but the reality is that it often takes just as long to get an appointment, it's much more expensive and the care is no better (evidenced by outcomes research) particularly if you look at the population as a whole.

Government payor = socialized medicine. There is no getting around that. Sounds like part of what you love about the UK system is that you did not have to deal with a third party payor.

When dealing with some of the socialized systems, certain treatments are not provided to those who are too ill or too old. That is a fact. Its called rationing.

Yes, insurance companies to have a say here in what treatments they will pay for. However, if you are in the hospital and need a specific treatment that is deemed necessary by your health care provider, you will get it, even if your insurance company won't pay.

So yes, I do wonder European or American, if some studies are swayed by the background economic culture. There are many here who say the European studies are better than the American ones because the American ones are swayed by economics. Who can say for sure that they both are not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the odds that European studies and procedures are affected by financial aspects as well? There are multiple socialized systems over there where care is rationed based on availability of medical doctors in a particular field and cost/benefit ratio analysis. Maybe all studies need to be taken with a grain of skepticism.

Strange that you would say that. Perhaps you should look at other studies in Europe that relate to elective procedures. Fertility is a good one. Do you suggest that European health care is not at the leading edge of fertility treatment because they may be trying to keep costs down? If that's the case how is it that IVF was pioneered in the UK?

Americans almost universally misunderstand how health care works in Europe. It would not be called "socialized" by almost anyone who lives there. Most Americans also misunderstand or mischaracterize how health care works in the US. For example, health care rationing occurs frequently in the US, with Medicaid or insurance companies calling the shots - or simply health care is rationed through ability to pay.

I am intimately familiar with health care both here and in Europe (particularly the UK). And I would choose the US for any sort of major health care issue. This is not even a little bit of a debate. Anyone who believes otherwise is very suspect in my mind.

pp here. I have spent almost 25 years in the UK and 15 years here. I suspect that I am a lot more familiar with both than you are, but certainly with the UK. This isn't the place for a debate on the pros and cons of each system, but I will tell you hands down that I would pick the UK for my health care. I had a major accident as a teen and the care was first rate and there was no quibbling with insurance companies or problems with lack of coordination of care or in fact any bills. My surgeon was amazing and he spent 5 hours of complex surgery to reassemble my broken limbs - now it's difficult to tell I even had an accident. My brother had a major accident as a young adult and was on a ventilator for a few days, very seriously ill. Again, amazing care in the hospital and follow up and all without a single bill. I had routine surgery as a young adult and then the same surgery a decade later in the US and still I'd pick the UK over my US experience (though my US experience was fine, just in the UK there were no insurance hassles). My father recently had a knee replacement in the UK. The waiting time for surgery was less than it took for my husband to get an appointment with an orthopedist here in the UK. His follow up treatment has also been excellent. There may be an illusion of "choice" here but the reality is that it often takes just as long to get an appointment, it's much more expensive and the care is no better (evidenced by outcomes research) particularly if you look at the population as a whole.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the odds that European studies and procedures are affected by financial aspects as well? There are multiple socialized systems over there where care is rationed based on availability of medical doctors in a particular field and cost/benefit ratio analysis. Maybe all studies need to be taken with a grain of skepticism.

Strange that you would say that. Perhaps you should look at other studies in Europe that relate to elective procedures. Fertility is a good one. Do you suggest that European health care is not at the leading edge of fertility treatment because they may be trying to keep costs down? If that's the case how is it that IVF was pioneered in the UK?

Americans almost universally misunderstand how health care works in Europe. It would not be called "socialized" by almost anyone who lives there. Most Americans also misunderstand or mischaracterize how health care works in the US. For example, health care rationing occurs frequently in the US, with Medicaid or insurance companies calling the shots - or simply health care is rationed through ability to pay.

I am intimately familiar with health care both here and in Europe (particularly the UK). And I would choose the US for any sort of major health care issue. This is not even a little bit of a debate. Anyone who believes otherwise is very suspect in my mind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the odds that European studies and procedures are affected by financial aspects as well? There are multiple socialized systems over there where care is rationed based on availability of medical doctors in a particular field and cost/benefit ratio analysis. Maybe all studies need to be taken with a grain of skepticism.

Strange that you would say that. Perhaps you should look at other studies in Europe that relate to elective procedures. Fertility is a good one. Do you suggest that European health care is not at the leading edge of fertility treatment because they may be trying to keep costs down? If that's the case how is it that IVF was pioneered in the UK?

Americans almost universally misunderstand how health care works in Europe. It would not be called "socialized" by almost anyone who lives there. Most Americans also misunderstand or mischaracterize how health care works in the US. For example, health care rationing occurs frequently in the US, with Medicaid or insurance companies calling the shots - or simply health care is rationed through ability to pay.

Anonymous wrote:What are the odds that European studies and procedures are affected by financial aspects as well? There are multiple socialized systems over there where care is rationed based on availability of medical doctors in a particular field and cost/benefit ratio analysis. Maybe all studies need to be taken with a grain of skepticism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess for the reason for infections is that the generation born in the 60s-80s in the US was heavily circumcised. Since those are now the parents, it makes sense to me that they are not teaching their uncirced sons how to clean themselves, because they don't know.

But nothing special has to be done. There is pretty much nothing to teach other than to wash yourself thoroughly which kids should be doing anyway.

I disagree. Before the foreskin retracts maybe. But once it does you must rinse underneath it. By that age kids are unsupervised in the bath and if mom or dad doesn't know to tell son, I can see it not occurring to everyone.

You really don't have a clue about a natural penis do you. No, you do not need to rinse underneath any more than you need to "douche" your vagina.

Natural penis? I didn't realize that circumcised penises were somehow fake. I'm sure that there are many men out there who will be quite surprised to learn that.

They are not fake, but they are no longer in their naturally born state.