Canadian Health Care Bests US

Discussion in 'Politics' started by alatide, Sep 20, 2009.

  1. alatide

    alatide
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Canadian Health Care, Even With Queues, Bests US
    By Pat Wechsler

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a_zs1Y1FspIM

    Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Opponents of overhauling U.S. health care argue that Canada shows what happens when government gets involved in medicine, saying the country is plagued by inferior treatment, rationing and months-long queues.

    The allegations are wrong by almost every measure, according to research by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and other independent studies published during the past five years. While delays do occur for non-emergency procedures, data indicate that Canada’s system of universal health coverage provides care as good as in the U.S., at a cost 47 percent less for each person.

    “There is an image of Canadians flooding across the border to get care,” said Donald Berwick, a Harvard University health- policy specialist and pediatrician who heads the Boston-based nonprofit Institute for Healthcare Improvement. “That’s just not the case. The public in Canada is far more satisfied with the system than they are in the U.S. and health care is at least as good, with much more contained costs.”

    Canadians live two to three years longer than Americans and are as likely to survive heart attacks, childhood leukemia, and breast and cervical cancer, according to the OECD, the Paris- based coalition of 30 industrialized nations.
    Deaths considered preventable through health care are less frequent in Canada than in the U.S., according to a January 2008 report in the journal Health Affairs. In the study by British researchers, Canada placed sixth among 19 countries surveyed, with 77 deaths for every 100,000 people. That compared with the last-place finish of the U.S., with 110 deaths.
    Infant Mortality

    The Canadian mortality rate from asthma is one quarter of the U.S.’s, and the infant mortality rate is 34 percent lower, OECD data show. People in Canada are also 21 percent more apt to survive five years after a liver transplant.
     
  2. twpaige

    twpaige
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    443
    Likes Received:
    0
    http://healthcare-economist.com/2007/10/02/health-care-system-grudge-match-canada-vs-us/

    The OECD can massage the numbers all they want. It's still a socialist system, which I am against.

    Something just doesn't ring true to me about the US being at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to infant mortality. Something smells fishy there and I'm just too tired to do any research and personally I really don't care to get into a mind-numbing debate with Alatide over his meaningless drivel.
     
  3. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    It appears "whoever" that you need to look beyond Bloomberg to get your lying propaganda! Read the following to find out the truth about the Canadian system. These results mirror what is reported about health care, or lack thereof, in England.

    http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/15034/Canadian_Health_Care_Is_No_Model_for_US.html

    Canadian Health Care Is No Model for U.S. - by Jay Lehr, Ph.D. - Health Care News

    Canadian Health Care Is No Model for U.S.

    Claims That Canada's Single-Payer Health System Is More Efficient or More Compassionate than Ours Are Just Plain Untrue


    Health Care News > June 2004
    Health Care
    Health Care > Canada/Britain
    Email a Friend
    Written By: Jay Lehr, Ph.D.
    Published In: Health Care News > June 2004
    Publication date: 06/01/2004
    Publisher: The Heartland Institute and The Galan Institute

    When one travels through Canada, as I regularly do, one cannot help but enter into frequent discussions on the pros and cons of health care in Canada versus the United States. The quiet, self-effacing Canadians cautiously vent their discontent with a system that, while apparently free for the individual citizen, comes with many drawbacks.

    From a health standpoint, the Canadian system's greatest failing is the unconscionable delay citizens must accept to obtain serious medical procedures. From an economic perspective, the costs of the system are extravagantly higher than reported by the government's suspect accounting system.

    HIDDEN COSTS

    Pierre Lemieux, an economist at The University of Quebec, wrote in the April 23, 2004 issue of the Wall Street Journal, "The Canadian system is built around a compulsory public insurance regime that provides most medical and hospital services free." Lemieux adds that the system is not, of course, free for the Canadian taxpayer. Twenty-two percent of all taxes raised in Canada are spent on its health care system.

    Last August, the New England Journal of Medicine reported health care spending absorbs only 10 percent of the Canadian gross domestic product, compared to 14 percent of U.S. GDP. The Journal credited Canada with being more efficient in the application of administrative costs--but the real difference is explained by the fact that U.S. citizens are permitted to pay privately for health care services, while such spending does not take place in Canada. In Canada, it is illegal to seek or convey private medical assistance.

    Canadian health insurance is compulsory, monopolistic, and administered by the various provincial governments under strict control of the federal government. It is illegal for a Canadian citizen to carry private insurance coverage for any health care services covered by the government. Physicians are told by the government how much they can charge for their services; drug prices are set by the government. The supply of medical services in Canada is completely rationed, with no significant private alternative.

    The alleged "low cost" of Canadian health care is thus no less a fraud than it was in the Soviet Union. Canadians may not pay the price in dollar terms ... but they pay a steep price indeed in terms of care denied or delayed and the poor quality of service provided by unhappy medical practitioners whose incomes do not match their skill and training.


    TAKE A NUMBER AND WAIT

    Long waiting lines are the worst flaw in the system. The Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank, calculated in 2003 the average Canadian waited more than four months for treatment by a specialist once the referral was made by a general practitioner. According to the Fraser Institute's work, the shortest median wait was 6.1 weeks for oncology (cancer) treatment without radiation. In some provinces, neurosurgery patients waited more than a year. A simple MRI requires, on average, a three-month wait in Canada.

    Long waits for critical care are an uncalculated cost of the Canadian health care system. A price tag could easily be calculated by determining how much patients would be willing to pay to reduce or eliminate these waiting times. We do this calculation on a regular basis in the United States in determining the charges for all services provided. In the U.S., we choose to pay higher prices in order to get more immediate care; in Canada, patients have no choice but to wait.
     
  4. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,163
    Likes Received:
    368
    Let me ask a question about the Canadian health care system.

    We had two congregants be diagnosed with AML (a very aggressive leukemia). The first was diagnosed at the end of June and was on chemo within 24 hours of diagnosis. She actually never even went home from the doctor's office. She did end up passing away less than 2 weeks ago but they didn't think she'd even make it that long. Still, they tried treatment.

    Now we have another who was just diagnosed one week ago tonight (Sunday). He went to the doctor on Thursday feeling very tired and had bloodwork done at the doctor's office. He went home and got a call that his white blood cell count was very low and they wanted to do a bone marrow biopsy. He had that done Friday morning. Sunday night his doctor called and said to be in the hospital first thing Monday morning and they'd start treament for the AML. He did have to wait until Friday to start chemo because he had cancer twice before and this cancer actually was most likely caused by the chemo of the last cancer and they had to figure out just how they'd treat him. He ended up in a trial for a new treatment and had his first chemo on Friday. That's less than one week from diagnosis - just 8 days from when he first saw the doctor.

    Would this happen in Canada? Would these tests and treatments have been done so quickly?
     
  5. twpaige

    twpaige
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    443
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks, OR! I knew we could count on you! :wavey:
     
  6. alatide

    alatide
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
    Mat 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
    Mat 25:43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
    Mat 25:44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
    Mat 25:45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me.
    Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
     
  7. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,163
    Likes Received:
    368
    I visit the sick. God didn't say we need to pay for all of their healthcare.
     
  8. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    Certainly libbies do not want to use scripture ( or in this case abuse it) to justify government action. After all they do support separation of church and state. Very hypocritical.
     
  9. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,613
    Likes Received:
    157
    I do not find this convincing as scripture does not say not to use your money for helping the sick. Now that I think about it, I find that maybe it does. Remember the story of the Good Samaritan?

    Back to the topic of the thread. We had two house guests last week who live in Canada. Talking of health care they said that most of what they read in the US press about Canadian health care is a lie. They used the word lie, not me. Both said that neither have ever had to wait an undue length of time for any needed medical procedure. Occasionally there are cases where mistakes are made, but that is certainly true here also.
    If they were uninsured here how fast would they have been see and given treatment? It probably would depend on the individual and how fast they went to the doctor. That being said, the uninsured often do not go to the doctor or a medical clinic quickly because of the cost and or because of the long waits in emergency rooms. You question about Canada. I do not know the answer other than from what our house guests said about never having to wait an undue length of time when attention was needed.

    My wife and I volunteer at a free clinic here. We know that people who are uninsured sometime die because of the lack of insurance which causes them to wait to get medical attention. We have seen this happen. This is a complicated issue. Some, even with insurance, do not like going to the doctor and wait while some fear medical costs that they know they cannot afford and some fear doctors.


     
    #9 Crabtownboy, Sep 21, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 21, 2009
  10. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's not all a bed of roses.

    "In 2008, 20 percent of chronically ill Canadians surveyed by the Commonwealth Fund reported waiting three months or more to see a specialist. Five percent of Americans polled said they had to wait that long."

    Also part of the Canadian system is to send patients to the U.S. for medical care. What would happen to their system if they did not have our "inferior" system to make up for their lack of technology and doctors?

    "In Ontario, where Holmes lives, the average waiting time for surgery to remove a tumor was 99 days in the second quarter, according to the Ontario Health Insurance Plan’s Web site. If a patient was willing to go closer to Ottawa, the wait was 36 days at Pembroke Regional Hospital Inc. in Pembroke, 460 miles from Waterdown and 93 miles northwest of the Canadian capital. Closer to Waterdown, a patient could go to St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, less than 10 miles away, with a 56-day wait."

    Not willing to wait Holmes went to the U.S. for care. She traveled 2,237 miles (3,599 kilometers) to the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona, and spent $97,000 for treatment of a benign brain tumor.
     
  11. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    Crabby and others want to use the government to force mandatory health insurance on everyone and then uses the Bible to justify it. Like Mitch I smell a big fat dead rat.
     
  12. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,163
    Likes Received:
    368


    Is the story of the Good Samaritan to teach us to take care of everyone else's medical bills?

    OK - then the next uninsured person who walks through the hospital doors is yours. :D

    I do not see any teaching in Scripture where we are to pay another's medical bills - or ANY bills for that matter.
     
  13. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    "whoever" has the typical leftist mindset. The Scripture he presented have nothing to do with the government, they are related to the actions of individuals. I posted the following on another thread in response to "whoever" but it is appropriate here as it shows the leftist mindset when it comes to charitable giving.

    ******************************************************************************

    It is a proven fact that Conservatives give far more to charity than leftists.

    GIVING BY ONE OF "whoevers" HEROS.

    http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/04/15/gore.taxes/

    WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, April 15) -- In a 34-page 1997 federal tax return, Vice President Al Gore and wife Tipper reported giving $353 to charity, an amount much lower than donations the family has made in previous tax cycles.

    That figure is less than one-tenth the typical contribution amount for someone with the Gores' adjusted gross income of $197,729. That fact has caused some bewilderment in philanthropic circles because of the vice president's "good guy" image as an advocate for public service and social causes, the Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday.
    .

    ******************************************************************

    THE REAL GENEROSITY OF LIBERALS

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

    If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

    -- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

    -- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

    -- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

    -- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

    -- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

    -- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

    Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.

    ******************************************************************
     
  14. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    That Scripture is applicable to individuals only. It is not related to the government taking ones money and giving it to someone else.

    As I recall in the story of the Good Samaritan he did not wait for the Romans to come along and help the man. He did it himself. So your analogy between the Good Samaritan and Socialized Health Care [If it can be called Health Care.] is nonsense.
     
  15. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,613
    Likes Received:
    157
    We live in a democracy. A democracy is made up of individuals and we as individuals are responsible for others. If individuals are too stingy to help others then the government will step in and do so. Your interpretations is a rather liberal one.

    Go thou and do likewise. But if you do not, do not be surprised if you are taxed to help others. To those who love money more than God, God will find a way to make them pay.

    Jesus praised the Good Samaritan.


     
  16. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    Well libbies certainly do not want to use scripture to support government action. That would go against separation of church and state.
     
  17. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,613
    Likes Received:
    157
    You call me a liberal ... and I used scripture. Of course I have noticed that you use very liberal interpretations of scripture to support your un-Christ like positions at times.

    Jesus spoke much about how we are to treat others. To really follow him we cannot ignore his teachings.
     
  18. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Where is this written that in a democracy individuals are responsible for others. In a democracy people are responsible for themselves.

    If the liberal/left would be as generous as the Conservatives with their giving perhaps the government would not need to help anyone! You might try reading the above posts just to see how ungenerous you liberal/leftists are.
     
  19. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,613
    Likes Received:
    157
    Neither is liberal enough in their giving to do what needs to be done. Thus, the government will step in whether we like it or not ... at least until a majority of the people say different.
     
  20. FlyForFun

    FlyForFun
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK, so Canadians speak English (well, most of them), drive Fords, and watch ER.

    Yet there are significant differences between Canada and the US -- differences which are ignored by those who see greener pastures across the northen border.

    Canada has 1/10th our population (33 million as compared to US 300million), with the majority clustered in a few large citieswith population exceeding 1 Million (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, Ottawa -- The NY metro region alone has more people than all of Canada).

    Canada has a long history of Government oversight in every area of life, and Canadians are quite content handing Government this power.

    Quebec acts as a nearly independent nation within Canada, with an official Language (French) and a unique culture.

    Comparing Canada to the US is convenient when taken out of context. Even MacCleans -- the magazine of record in Canada -- revealed the problems in Canadian healthcare: http://www.macleans.ca/science/health/article.jsp?content=20080102_122329_6200
     

Share This Page

Loading...