Normally I just sigh and move on, because just how crazy are you supposed to drive yourself when Drudge pulls his crap? But this is something that could come up into the discourse, and I thought I'd take a minute to try to set the record straight.
Drudge's headline is "9-month wait for arthritis treatment in UK"....
OH MY GOD DON'T LET OBAMA SOCIALIZE OUR HEALTH CARE!!
(ahem)
I mean - let's take a minute and see what the *#!@ Drudge is talking about....follow me below the fold to an interesting UK National Audit Office report....
So Drudge says it's a 9-month wait for arthritis treatment - right? Well - surprise surprise - that's not at all what the report says. Follow the link at goes to the conservative Daily Mail:
Daily Mail
The UK government report was about two different problems that lead to people not getting treated early enough for rheumatoid arthritis - 1) People delay themselves months and months months after the onset of symptoms before going to the doctor (50-75% of people wait more than 3 months before going to the doctor, 20% wait over a year!); and 2) GP's don't refer to specialists quickly enough.
You can see the full report here.
These two factors COMBINE to make it likely that people with new onset of rheumatoid arthritis wait too long before getting treatment. This DOES NOT mean that it there's a "9-month wait" for treatment. So they're encouraging GP's to refer to specialists quicker, and they're encouraging people to go the doctor sooner when symptoms appear. Perfectly reasonable, like the Brits often are.
So where does this leave us on this side of the pond?
Well, of course, Drudge is obviously hyping this story to make us think that the Dems want to do things exactly like they do it in Britain, and when the Dems succeed at it, life is going to suck. Obviously, this particular line of reasoning is crap because the National Health Service is not the model that's being proposed.
The other thing that I think is useful to point out is that the government conducted an independent audit of the program, reached conclusions scientifically, and informed the public and decision makers. Isn't that the way a democracy is supposed to work?