Healthcare has always been important to humans. Poor healthcare leads to sickness and death. Naturally you would think that this would make us want to work together to ensure everyone had access to the best medicine. Unfortunately, this is not the case in many countries especially in one of the richest countries in the world, the USA. Why? Well to put it simple greed. Healthcare is a must for anyone to live so naturally the greedy amongst us has found a way to make the most profit imaginable off of something that should be cheap and readily available.
Growing up in America I experienced first hand the for profit system the elite have come to cherish. What is fascinating to me is that I never learned that other countries did not have such a barbaric system in place until after I was in college. I suppose that's why they say you become more liberal with a college degree. The biggest excuse you get when trying to bring up a universal healthcare plan is its too expensive and cannot be implemented well. Unfortunately for those that make this excuse is that not only can it be done and has been done by 10 out of 11 of the richest countries in the world. The only hold out is us at #2. So, if the 9 countries poorer than us can do it what's our excuse. Also, studies have shown that it would actually save us money not to mention we would no longer have to stand by and watch the greedy refuse to help heal the less fortunate amongst us.
Naturally health care systems around the world are very different and influenced by the citizens, the government and the private sector. The goal is supposed to be to provide the best healthcare at an affordable price. However, for-profit and healthcare don't mix well. Their is a spectrum of ways health care is delivered can be presented in four general categories that range from fully funded national programs to no coverage at all, which requires individuals to pay for health care fully out of pocket.
1. Universal coverage with single-payer system
A national health care plan where everyone is covered and is fully funded by the government.
In socialized health care countries such as Cuba & the United Kingdom, the government delivers care through public hospitals & clinics.
In single-payer systems, like Canada, doctors are not government employees.
2. Universal coverage with multi-payer system
A national health insurance system administered by competing insurers and typically included a private insurance option for high income people. Regulation and direct negotiation with pharmaceutical companies help governments keep costs low.
In countries like France, Germany, and Switzerland people are required to have mostly publicly funded health care.
Singapore has an option that allows people to pay more for better, more individualized service.
3. Multi-payer system with no universal coverage.
There is a mix of healthcare programs, but health care is not required. Private insurance companies are free to do what they please with very little government involvement. Although this does give a rise to advanced medical technology it also brings high costs and no guarantee health coverage.
Naturally you will only find this absurd system in one country, the United States.
Some people have private insurance through their employers.
If they are over 65 they can be covered under single-payer Medicare.
If they have a disability or earn less than a certain amount they can be covered under Medicaid.
If they have served in the military they can have socialized care through the Veterans Health Administration.
They can also purchase private insurance on exchanges set up by the Affordable Care Act or as twenty-eight million people do, go uninsured.
4. No national health care infrastructure (completely out of pocket)
Unfortunately, for most of the developing world their is no national healthcare infrastructure in place.
Health care gets little to no subsidizing and the government of an average low-income country spends $23 per person on healthcare. For comparison, the United States spends $3,860 & the United Kingdom spends $2,695.
Obtaining access to to doctors, vaccines, and medications is limited.
Aid organizations will try to fill the gab, but a large portion of global health financing today only targets specific diseases, not holistic or preventative care.
Due to all the different economic, geographic and political situations its difficult to expect one approach to healthcare to work for all countries. However, a universal goal to provide quality health care to the maximum numbers of people at an affordable price is a good step in the right direction.
Humanity has come a long way in the field of global health over the last century. Overall the world is much healthier. The global life expectancy is rising and infectious disease rates are declining. A healthier world has brought its own set of challenges. For one, the gains that we have made in global health have not been made evenly around the world, so much that in many places, people are still dying of preventable illnesses. With a more interconnected world, infectious diseases are spread faster from one area of the world to another. Even our greater life expectancy has brought problems. Noncommunicable diseases(NCDs)- such as cancer, diabetes, and dementia- have become the leading cause of death and disability globally. The lack of international funding and cooperation to treat and prevent diseases along with the challenges of emerging disease trends has made progress difficult. Even though their is a crowded field of UN agencies, international organizations, governmental donors, and private donors, most funding comes from two major sources, the U.S. government the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. This ironically puts the future of global health advancements in the hands of perhaps the most violent and unhealthy countries and the owners of Microsoft.
Thanks to better science and more funding, global health has made enormous progress in the past 100 years. Through our use of current scientific understanding, resources and technology- from new vaccines to better health facilities- we are able to tackle more diseases affecting a larger number of people. The success in making global health an international priority- now overtly linked to national security, economic prosperity, and climate change- has become a trend in international development. The global health organization is constantly making new connections and gaining new donors which has greatly enabled them to bring the number of deaths from infections diseases down significantly. However, despite a century of progress, infectious diseases still remain a lingering threat. Since 2000, when child mortality and maternal health became priorities for the Millennium Development Goals, governments, NGOs, and private partners have invested in more programs, such as sex education, nutrition, and pre- and postnatal care, that enables mothers and babies stay healthy. After years of declining, maternal mortality is rising in the United States- the only industrialized country to do so- particularly among black women. The world is combating the rise of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). Heart disease is the biggest killer in the United states. In 1990 3 out of the top 7 causes of death worldwide were NCDs; by 2015 that number grew to 6 out of 7 and 73% of all deaths result from NCDs. Although most people do ultimately die due to an NCD most global health funding doesn't target them. Why? Well, simply put it requires people to change their lifestyle and it requires people to be able to afford a healthy active lifestyle. Infectious diseases are more attractive intervention areas for donors. Ultimately, the questions surrounding how best to treat NCDs and how to tackle other emerging health challenges are a sign of how the global health field has changed. Health is about more than just doctor visits and vaccinations. There are a range of issues that affect a person's health and their vulnerability to NCDs- including poverty, gender equality, systemic racism, mental health and climate change.
