US: Lack of insurance linked to thousands of child deaths

[Hannah Bell]

Lack of health insurance may have caused or directly contributed to the deaths of nearly 17,000 children in the United States over the past two decades, a new study has found.

Research of the Johns Hopkins Children’s Center, published October 30 in the Journal of Public Health, indicates that uninsured children were far more likely to die in the hospital than those with insurance. The study took in over 23 million hospital records from 37 states from 1988 through 2005 and accounted for a number of factors.

The study revealed 104,520 patient deaths out of 22.2 million insured hospitalized children, a mortality rate of 0.47 percent. In comparison, out of 1.2 million uninsured children, 9,468 died in the hospital, a rate of 0.75 percent. In order to find out how many of these deaths would have been prevented by health insurance, researchers applied a statistical simulation to the uninsured group by projecting the expected number of insured patient deaths based on the severity of their medical conditions.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/oct2009/chld-o30.shtml

[eridani]

1. Don't they mean lack of CARE? n/t

[Hannah Bell]

2. In this study, they actually mean lack of insurance. The kids studied were

all under hospital care, but the uninsured were more likely to die.

Hint in the story; they tended to come in through the ER & have postponed treatment - likely because no insurance.

[eridani]

5. OK, I see. Thanks. n/t

[ConsAreLiars]

3. No insurance and no large bank account = poor ----> PoorCare. (nt)

[pnwmom]

4. Many doctors won't accept patients without insurance even if they can pay cash.

And people without insurance tend to put off medical care, even for their children.

So these people can end up in emergency rooms, and sometimes it's too late.

[gristy]

24. Indeed yes. Lack of health care is the problem.

[HamdenRice]

6. Maybe WSWS says so, but WWN says otherwise

WWN says that the Obama administration takes care of all the sick bat boy children.

WWN is much, much more trust worthy than WSWS. As it's web site says, WWN is the world's only reliable news source.

http://weeklyworldnews.com/politics/election-08/3418/bat-boy-backs-obama/

[ipaint]

7. Actually it was John Hopkin's Children center that conducted the study.

Do you have a comparative website for them?

[HamdenRice]

8. All the OP says is that WSWS reports John Hopkins did a study

WSWS lies about everything so there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that JH did a study, or if they did, that what WSWS says was in it, was actually in it.

By that standard, I could say World Weekly News reports that Johns Hopkins has done a study that says a complete genome of Batboy, proves that Batboy and Kenyan batboy, "Obatma," are third cousins.

The point is that WSWS and WWN have EXACTLY the same credibility for those of us in the reality based community.

[ipaint]

9. Your personal vendettas don't trump the truth.

http://baltimore.bizjournals.com/baltimore/stories/2009/10/26/daily51.html

6th story down
http://web.jhu.edu/clips

http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/newsstory.aspx?docID=632562


Sorry this time your credibility is in the toilet.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

10. Yet again

The poster (in response #8) avoided all the facts instead opting for reactionary tripe that should not be allowed. You posted the very real factual accounts. Thanks for that.

Perhaps some people take this in the abstract and don't care that what this means is a matter of life and death for far too many. Perhaps in their incessant defense of the status quo and their flip comments they put on full display that they simply don't care.

K&R

[Starry Messenger]

12. Thank you.

HR has all the credibility of the timecube guy. No one takes him seriously. Good links.

[HamdenRice]

14. Thanks for the reliable source!

I see you agree that you can't know whether anything posted to WSWS is true or not, and we need citations to other sources!

:hi:

[ipaint]

18. LOL. pathetic.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

11. For all your blather

about being reality-based you once again avoided all the very real details of the Johns Hopkins study in lieu of cruel reactionary flippancy.

The level of misanthropic attitude in your glibness is laid bare for all to see.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

16. By actually reading the article

and of course it's always good to question but you didn't even get past the first sentence of the second paragraph, check that you didn't even make it that far, before your frothing response. That's called being a reactionary. But here let me help you, from that first sentence in the second paragraph:

Research of the Johns Hopkins Children’s Center, published October 30 in the Journal of Public Health,

Again, your manipulative and dishonest reaction is on full display for all to see. Don't even need to hand you the rope.

[HamdenRice]

17. Dag, Bwana, how can you not get it?

The article was on WSWS.

WSWS specializes in lying. It's like the Onion or World Weekly News. What they say may be true, but it's even more likely that it's not true.

Just because WSWS says Johns Hopkins did a study is no evidence whatsoever that Johns Hopkins did a study.

Why is that simple concept so incomprehensible to you?

You need to take off the Confederate re-enactor's uniform and stop shooting off those muzzle loading muskets -- because your reading comprehension is getting gravely compromised.

[ipaint]

19. Your statement.

"WSWS lies about everything so there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that JH did a study, or if they did, that what WSWS says was in it, was actually in it."


1 lousy minute on google and it's verified so apparently they don't lie about EVERYTHING and certainly not about this study.

Please post proof of your assertion that they lie about everything. Where are your facts, your evidence, your verifiable links?
Or is this a "do as I say not as I do" opinion because if it is, arguing a belief sans facts is pointless. You lose.

[HamdenRice]

20. There's a difference between ...

"They lie about everything" and "Everything they say is a lie."

I've debunked so many of their stories that I can confidently say that they have lied about every subject they've written about.

I'll leave it to you to use the DU search function.

[ipaint]

21. I'll pass.

Searching DU would theoretically bring up your posts and then I'm back to square one because you have no credibility.

[anonymous171]

13. People die all the time. It's inevitable. Stop trying to run from the inescapable

:sarcasm:

[BeHereNow]

22. Not to worry, we're killing children over there, so we don't have to kill them here.

Oh wait-

BHN

[gristy]

23. Lack of health care is the problem.

Insurance never cured any disease.