Posted By Damjan DeNoble

CNN has been ‘profiling’ healthcare systems around the world to supposedly help American viewers get a better idea of how their healthcare system stacks up, and where its future might lie.

I was struck by the blistering tone of the Chinese healthcare system profile compared to the much more even handed piece on the Indian healthcare system.  While China’s healthcare efforts are described as “struggling” and “corrupt”, India’s healthcare efforts are characterized as “making progress” and “praiseworthy”.  A slew of Asian healthcare experts are also edited into the both pieces in order to legitimize the profiles.  The truth is, both characterizations are grossly misleading – China’s healthcare system ain’t all bad, and India’s healthcare system is primarily made up of third world components.

China and India both face tremendous moral hazard challenges with their healthcare systems mostly because doctor’s receiving state salaries are paid very little and the need for healthcare far outstrips resources. There is some truth to there being more Indian doctors, but Lou Dobb’s piece makes it sound like no doctor in China should be trusted.  WRONG.  Chinese doctors are quite good (as are Indian doctors) largely due to the fact that they have to see so many patients.  The ‘doctors’ that have less than four years of schooling compose a crucial part of the primary healthcare net that supplies basic medical services to rural inhabitants who would otherwise have no other options.  The part that goes unmentioned in the piece is that this is often more than what many American’s in rural areas can attest to.

Moreover, access to healthcare is a much grimmer picture in India (estimated that 50% of the Indian population does not have access to healthcare) than in China, and the healthcare improvements we are seeing through the construction of the “hub and spoke” models described in the India profile mostly benefits Indians who can already afford to pay out of pocket. Furthermore, the same private sector developments are going on everywhere in Southeast Asia – private specialty hospitals are money making businesses.

China’s healthcare reforms do have their drawbacks (I have covered them here, here, here, and here) but the reforms only started this past year and the improvements (here, here, and here) have been moving along at an impressive pace. The latest reported development is that Chinese patients are now going to be able to purchase medications outside of the hospital in private pharmacies, a fact that should substantially cut down on price gauging. There is  something to be said for china’s rural health cooperatives which are making healthcare access more affordable to peasants.  And, the fact that a trip to see a doctor at a Chinese hospital for a checkup costs about $1.50 is also worthy of mention (indeed, one of China’s biggest problems is that the healthcare system is overused because it is so cheap.  I don’t know how many times I have heard Chinese friends in Beijing say that they went to get an IV at the hospital because they had a cold).

India, on the other hand, is a state that has to tally up 700 million votes for a presidential election which makes it very difficult to reform its healthcare system – especially since the system is state funded and any changes have to be voted upon.  Like Manish Rathi wrote in a column last week, India finds its healthcare system at a crossroads.

Bottom line:  The profiles presented by CNN have been edited with a political agenda in mind.  Fortunately for us Senator Reid has put the opt out public option back into the healthcare bill.