av8torntn
Well-Known Member
How is he forcing a child into this world? If anything he supports giving the child the option to live.
Planned Parenthood
- Thread starter moreluck
- Start date
How is he forcing a child into this world? If anything he supports giving the child the option to live.
tourists24
Well-Known Member
Or maybe even find a caring home
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
If we just would give the government just a little more of our money life would be all sunshine and ponies.Lack of Insurance May Have Figured In Nearly 17,000 Childhood Deaths, Study Shows
MEDIA CONTACT: Ekaterina Pesheva
PHONE: (410) 502-9433
October 29, 2009
Lead investigator Fizan Abdullah, M.D., Ph.D., is a pediatric surgeon at Hopkins Children's
Lack of health insurance might have led or contributed to nearly 17,000 deaths among hospitalized children in the United States in the span of less than two decades, according to research led by the Johns Hopkins Children's Center.
According to the Johns Hopkins researchers, the study, published Oct. 29 in theJournal of Public Health, is one of the largest ever to look at the impact of insurance on the number of preventable deaths and the potential for saved lives among sick children in the United States.
Using more than 23 million hospital records from 37 states between 1988 and 2005, the Johns Hopkins investigators compared the risk of death in children with insurance and in those without. Other factors being equal, researchers found that uninsured children in the study were 60 percent more likely to die in the hospital than those with insurance. When comparing death rates by underlying disease, the uninsured appeared to have increased risk of dying independent regardless of their medical condition, the study found. The findings only capture deaths during hospitalization and do not reflect deaths after discharge from the hospital, nor do they count children who died without ever being hospitalized, the researchers say, which means the real death toll of non-insurance could be even higher.
"If you are a child without insurance, if you're seriously ill and end up in the hospital, you are 60 percent more likely to die than the sick child in the next room who has insurance," says lead investigator Fizan Abdullah, M.D., Ph.D., a pediatric surgeon at the Johns Hopkins Children's Center.
The researchers caution that the study looked at hospital records after the fact of death so they cannot directly establish cause and effect between health insurance and risk of dying. However because of the volume of records analyzed and because of the researchers' ability to identify and eliminate most factors that typically cloud such research, the analysis shows a powerful link between health insurance and risk of dying, they say.
"Can we say with absolute certainty that 17,000 children would have been saved if they had health insurance? Of course not," says co-investigator David Chang, Ph.D. M.P.H. M.B.A. "The point here is that a substantial number of children may be saved by health coverage."
"From a scientific perspective, we are confident in our finding that thousands of children likely did die because they lacked insurance or because of factors directly related to lack of insurance," he adds.
Given that more than 7 million American children in the United States remain uninsured amidst this nation's struggle with health-care reform, researchers say policymakers and, indeed, society as a whole should pay heed to their findings.
"Thousands of children die needlessly each year because we lack a health system that provides them health insurance. This should not be," says co-investigator Peter Pronovost, M.D., Ph.D., director of Critical Care Medicine at Johns Hopkins and medical director of the Center for Innovations in Quality Patient Care. "In a country as wealthy as ours, the need to provide health insurance to the millions of children who lack it is a moral, not an economic issue," he adds.
In the study, 104,520 patients died (0.47 percent) out of 22.2 million insured hospitalized children, compared to 9, 468 (0.75 percent) who died among the 1.2 million uninsured ones. To find out what portion of these deaths would have been prevented by health insurance, researchers performed a statistical simulation by projecting the expected number of deaths for insured patients based on the severity of their medical conditions among other factors, and then applied this expected number of deaths to the uninsured group.
In the uninsured group, there were 3,535 more deaths than expected, not explained by disease severity or other factors. Going a step further and applying the excess number of deaths to the total number of pediatric hospitalizations in the United States (117 million) for the study period, the researchers found an excess of 16,787 deaths among the nearly six million uninsured children who ended up in the hospital during that time.
Other findings from the study:
The research was funded by the Robert Garrett Fund for the Treatment of Children.
- More uninsured children were seen in hospitals in the Northeast and Midwest than in the South and West. However, hospitals from the Northeast had lower mortality rates than hospitals from the South, Midwest and West.
- Insured children on average incurred higher hospital charges than uninsured children, most likely explained by the fact that uninsured children tend to present to the hospital at more advanced stages of their disease, which in turn gives doctors less chance for intervention and treatment, especially in terminal cases, investigators say.
- Uninsured patients were more likely to seek treatment though the Emergency Room, rather than through a referral by a doctor, likely markers of more advanced disease stage and/or delays in seeking medical attention.
- Insurance status did not affect how long a child spent overall in the hospital.
Co-investigators in the study include Yiyi Zhang, M.H.S.; Thomas Lardaro, B.S.; Marissa Black; Paul Colombani, M.D.; Kristin Chrouser, M.D. M.P.H.
Guess St Judes doesn't do enough.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
We are not forcing anything.
Unless a woman was raped, she and the guy know the consequences of their actions.
I mean, all forms of birth control are out there that are cheap or free.
You are acting like everyone who ends up pregnant had no idea it would happen.
You are acting like they are children, unaware of their actions may cause a pregnancy.
You libs always think you know better than the population of adults you think are children.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
She had a heartbeat in the 1st trimester.
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
You tell me. Without giving them the tools to survive, are you not killing them after they are born?
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
Only to die later because his or her family doesn't have the resources to care for them.
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
But the government passed a law requiring everyone to purchase health insurance. If that doesn't work for you then they can get the best health care in the world for their serious health problem at St Jude.
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
Not even close. I do not believe a pregnancy resulting from a rape should be forced to be brought to term.
I do not believe that a pregnancy that risks the health or life of the mother should be either.
The mother should have the choice to terminate the pregnancy, not the state.
I do not believe that a pregnancy that risks the health or life of the mother should be either.
The mother should have the choice to terminate the pregnancy, not the state.
Do you know how many people that would love to have children and can't?
Upstate, what changes from the second to the third trimester in terms of form? They still have a heart, lungs and a developing brain (which is more than I can say for some members here). If it has a heartbeat it's a living being. Calling it an abortion or even worse a "medical term" is sugar coating murder. So if it's okay for them to kill the babies, it should be equally okay for me to "abort" some abortion doctors
My wife and I struggled for years, and even with fertility treatments she had a miscarriage. Some people can get pregnant by being around sperm, others spend thousands of dollars and many years for the chance.
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
I think the rate of abortion due to rape is very low.
Not being able to afford health care is a non issue.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
The abortion rate due to rape is low due to the "Morning After" pill.
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
I know several people that have went through that it's a big strain on your life and your marriage .
tourists24
Well-Known Member
So killing them because they "may" have a rough life... nah.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
My wife had to go through treatments to get pregnant.
And then some people just destroy what others have such a hard time creating.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Someone asked earlier, so I'll ask you since you're a big religion/RTL person. What are you personally going to do if abortion becomes illegal and there are lots of new babies running around with teenage parents, irresponsible parents who shouldn't ever be parents, poor parents who cannot afford a child etc? Going to adopt a Black or Hispanic baby? How about a white one?
My guess is NOTHING. You bitch and moan about abortion and how a cluster of cells is a "baby", so if you get your way, what is the Republican "plan"?
There isn't one, just like everything else. And, no. Praying over it won't help.
