Well: the Yankees managed to throw it all away, and got rid of their boss in the process. We had the warmest October on record. I had a letter published in the local newspaper. And Jackpot was neutered today. I had the day off work. He's downstairs sleeping right now. poor little guy!
OK, so I want to talk politics today, seeing as it's a local election day here. We recently had Rudy Giuliani, ex-mayor of New York (and a man said to use three things in every sentence: a noun, a verb, and 9/11) say that he survived prostate cancer. Fair enough, good for him. But then he decided to make a political football out of it by saying that if he were in Britain, his chances would have been around half. And he rubbished what he likes to call 'socialized medicine'.
OK, first of all: as mayor of NYC, he got free healthcare. His costs were largely underwritten by city taxpayers.
Whoopsie.
Then he said in a campaign piece that he's glad he was getting this (free) treatment in America because;
In the radio spot, Giuliani mentions his battle with prostate cancer and notes that his chances of surviving the disease in America were 82 percent, while in England his chances would have been 44 percent.
Shyeah. And then some journalists did their job and found out he lied. The British government’s National Statistics Web site lists prostate cancer survival from 1999 to 2004 at 74.4 percent.
In fact, both the 82 percent and 44 percent figures came from City Journal, a publication of the Manhattan Institute, a conservative "think tank". Not a medical journal by any means, and one with an ideological axe to grind.
Whoopsie again.
Then someone found this PDF detailing te death rates for Americans and Brits from prostate cancer from 1970 to well into the 1990s. As you see from page 1 (and the nice graph), there are virtually identical prostate cancer mortality rates in the United States and Great Britain.
Holy whoopsie, Batman.
Now: you'd think a nice guy like me would just cut Rudy Giuliani a break. After all, he's old and maybe his mental faculties aren't all that great. But seeing as he wants to be the next President, and seeing as he wants to send other people's kids over to fight Iran, I decided I needed to land a knockout blow for myself.
Seeing as Rudy's an old man and he fears change, I'm going to play by his rules. We're going to find a disease. One where I can show you government numbers of how many people died. And the numbers have to be from the same year. I need American numbers and British numbers.
Oh, and if I can find something the British were looking for more than America's health providers were, and STILL show that British people had a better chance of surviving, we'll say that his old ass is mine. And if it turns out that CONSERVATIVES in Britain were trying to score political points off the disease or illness, so much the better.
So what illness or disease can I pick? I know. MRSA!
OK, MRSA is on the news in America now. But we don't have the stats for this year because the year's not over ...I said I want a year where we have numbers. And I want a year where nobody in the US gave two hoots about MRSA, but for some reason everyone in Britain was going nuts about it. Remember, we want to make the rules of this game so that Rudy can't possibly lose. I want to give all the best cards to Rudy and STILL beat him. So what year do I pick?
Let's say ...an election year. We're having elections here today, so that's perfect. When was the last big election year in Britain?
2005. Let's pick 2005.
As can be seen here, UK Conservatives were using MRSA as a talking point against 'socialized medicine', otherwise known as the National Health Service (NHS) because it was an election year. The [f]right-wing in Britain had spent decades trying to privatize and dismantle the NHS, spending more on consultants and managers than nurses, and in 2005 they claimed to be the savior of this system? Apparently so - the link above (that says 'here') was by a Conservative politician at their 2005 Party Conference. It's from their Party website, and this guy's saying MRSA is killing thousands, thanks to the British healthcare system. He says it's not just MRSA killing thousands, but other infections are killing thousands too.
Thousands. Plural. We'll get to the real numbers that died that year from MRSA in 2005 in just a minute.
It wasn't just in a few speeches, either. Look at this newspaper advert where the Conservative Party AGAIN says that thousands die. 5,000, it said, EVERY YEAR. Conservatives are saying that these deaths are a DIRECT RESULT of the way healthcare is performed in Britain.
So let's look at those real numbers, shall we? UK figures from 2005. Here they are from the UK Office for National Statistics itself, showing the deaths in 2005 from MRSA in England and Wales: 1,629.
That's not 'thousands', as Conservative Member of Parliament Andrew Lansley said in his speech that I linked to. 'Thousands' would be at least two thousand ...that's how plurals work in English. There need to be at least two of something for it to be a plural, and this guy is English so he should know. The man's from South Cambridgeshire ...they have quite a reputation for education in Cambridge. Universities known throughout the world.
Four whoopsies.
Back to that UK Statistics page: it says: "Some of the recent increase in mentions of MRSA on death certificates may be due to improved levels of reporting, possibly brought about by the continued high public profile of the disease." Maybe it had a high profile in the UK in 2005, but here in America MRSA received no sensational domestic press at all that year.
So, what we've learned: the number of British deaths was lower than Conservatives wanted. Yet the politicians still blame these deaths on how the NHS is run, as a government department. His speech mentions the private sector and how he wants "hospitals to invest". He wants them to run like businesses, just like American healthcare is run.
American figures, now. Reported from a CDC (Centers for Disease Control) report: "Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was responsible for an estimated 94,000 life-threatening infections and 18,650 deaths in 2005".
Deaths in England/Wales: 1,629. Deaths in the USA: 18,650.
OK, there are a lot more people in the USA than England/Wales. What are those numbers? Let's get them from the UK Statistics government website, and the US Census website.
England and Wales population, 52 million people.
USA population in 2005, 295 million people.
All we need to do now is divide population that year, by deaths that year, and we get your chance of dying from MRSA for that year.
Chances of dying of MRSA in England and Wales, with both nations rabidly looking for MRSA, in 2005 - 1 in 32,000.
Chances of dying the same death in a country with market-driven health system, where people are NOT specifically looking for MRSA - 1 in 15,800.
How does that look like in a graph? Say you calculated the number of deaths per million people. How would that look?
There was no media hype concerning drug-resistant Staph infection deaths in the United States, it wasn't even a pressing issue in the 2006 elections. Yet the facts are as plain as the nose on Rudy Giuliani's face. We all were more likely to die from MRSA in Seattle or San Antonio than the Engish and Welsh living in London or Llanelli. Despite everyone looking for MRSA under every hospital pillow and mop over there, the lack of a decent all-encompassing healthcare system in the States killed off people with MRSA at over twice the UK rate.
If anyone wants to run for President on a healthcare statistic, I suggest they run on this one. These numbers weren't invented by any think-tank. They're a cold hard fact. People are quite literally dying to get the treatment provided to every person in the UK, no matter what sound-bites Conservatives the world over will use.
Giuliani: I believe this ass is yours, so I'm handing it to you.
Listen: Ben Wah Balls - Blink 182 ... Thoughts Of A Dying Atheist - Muse ... Shake The Disease - Depeche Mode.
