Interesting parallels with the Canadian fight for universal healthcare

[Chris]

How about you research the survival rates for every cancer in the US and Canada.

Don't bother, I've already done it:

Circulatory disease deaths per 100,000:
Canada: 219
United States: 265

Original Source: OECD Health Data 2003 and Health Data 2002. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australia's Health 2002

Digestive disease deaths per 100,000:
Canada: 17.4
United States: 20.5

Original Source: World Health Organization

Infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births
Canada: 5.08
United States: 6.3

Original Source: CIA World Factbooks

Intestinal diseases death rate
Canada: 0.3%
United States: 7.3%

Original Source: World Health Organization

Respiratory disease child death rate per 100,000
Canada: 0.62
United States: 40.43

Original Source: World Health Organization

Heart disease deaths per 100,000:
Canada: 94.9
United States: 106.5

Original Source: World Health Organization

HIV deaths per million people:
Canada: 47.423
United States: 48.141

Original Source: CIA World Factbooks

And here's an interesting fact:

Proability of not reaching age 60:
Canada: 9.5%
United States: 12.8%

Original Source: CIA World Factbooks

______________________________________________________________________

The average life span in Canada is 2-3 years longer than the average life span in the United States.

______________________________________________________________________

Per Capita, national health expenditures in the United States are as follows, as of 2007:

Private: $3,991.00
Public: $3,429.00

Source: Dpt of Health and Human Services

_______________________________________________________________________

World health care rankings:

UK: #18
Canada #30
US: #37

Source: World Health Organization

_______________________________________________________________________

Average cost per patient:

USA: $6714.00
Canada: $3678.00
UK: $2760.00

Source: The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Damn the CIA and their facts!

 

[PoliticalChic]

me neither!
I have a lot of canadian that come into my work because we are near the border and none of them say they don't like it. I asked a lady who is a nurse and she didn't have one bad thing to say about it.
I remember when I was twenty going up to BC to drink and these two guys were ripping on us about our health care. I don't think I have ever talked to a canadian who didn't like their health care.

I hear that a great deal. The problem is not that it's ancedotal, I'll give you some anecdotals too, but the concept of healthcare insurance itself.

It should protect you form the big healthproblem and the losses it causes, such as bankruptcy. If you ask that much smaller group, who has has serious health problems- not co-pay or broken arms, you would get a different response.

"Mountain-bike enthusiast Suzanne Aucoin had to fight more than her Stage IV colon cancer. Her doctor suggested Erbitux—a proven cancer drug that targets cancer cells exclusively, unlike conventional chemotherapies that more crudely kill all fast-growing cells in the body—and Aucoin went to a clinic to begin treatment. But if Erbitux offered hope, Aucoin’s insurance didn’t: she received one inscrutable form letter after another, rejecting her claim for reimbursement. Yet another example of the callous hand of managed care, depriving someone of needed medical help, right? Guess again. Erbitux is standard treatment, covered by insurance companies—in the United States. Aucoin lives in Ontario, Canada.

Rick Baker helps people, and sometimes even saves lives. He describes a man who had a seizure and received a diagnosis of epilepsy. Dissatisfied with the opinion—he had no family history of epilepsy, but he did have constant headaches and nausea, which aren’t usually seen in the disorder—the man requested an MRI. The government told him that the wait would be four and a half months. So he went to Baker, who arranged to have the MRI done within 24 hours—and who, after the test discovered a brain tumor, arranged surgery within a few weeks.

Timely Medical Alternatives, has helped—people like the elderly woman who needed vascular surgery for a major artery in her abdomen and was promised prompt care by one of the most senior bureaucrats in the government, who never called back. “Her doctor told her she’s going to die,” Baker remembers. So Timely got her surgery in a couple of days, in Washington State. Then there was the eight-year-old badly in need of a procedure to help correct her deafness. After watching her surgery get bumped three times, her parents called Timely.
The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care by David Gratzer, City Journal Summer 2007

Holmes (see video below) was diagnosed with brain cancer, with her vision deteriorating rapidly, but was placed on the treatment waiting lists common to health care in socialist countries. While the average wait time for many procedures can run 18 months or more, Holmes actually made out pretty good by only having to wait 6 months for surgery for her brain tumor.
Rather than wait like a good little subject, she came to the States and got the health care she needed within three weeks. You know, the United States health care system liberals claim is so broken it must be replaced with a government system…you know, kinda like the one in Canada.
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/06/where-can-americans-go-for-treatment-under-govt-health-care/


Minor problem: Canada

Major health problem: get to the US of A!

A friend of mine got cancer. She decided to seek a natural treatment in Mexico. Her onocologist SCREAMED AT HER that she would be dead in six months if she didn't get chemo. She refused. She got treatment in Mexico and the cost was $3,200 dollars for life. Six months later her cancer was gone. That was 8 years ago...

Blessings on your friend. A great story.

Although we would all like to hold on to the rare, and anecdotal, event, I don't think you or your friend would recommend that to all who are blighted in that way. Let's hope it remains relatively rare.


And since the vast majority of Americans are happy with their healthcare, and even more if they or a family member has had a serious medical problem in the last year, is it your belief that they should be dragged from same, into ObamaCare?

A major criticism of liberals is their view that they know what is good for the rest of us, better than we know. Is this your view of democracy?

Consider the following:

The most recent ABC News/Washington Post poll (June 21) finds that 83 percent of Americans are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the quality of their health care, and 81 percent are similarly satisfied with their health insurance.

They have good reason to be. If you're diagnosed with cancer, you have a better chance of surviving it in the United States than anywhere else, according to the Concord Five Continent Study. And the World Health Organization ranked the United States No. 1 out of 191 countries for being responsive to patients' needs, including providing timely treatments and a choice of doctors.
Defend Your Health Care

Among insured Americans, 82 percent rate their health coverage positively. Among insured people who've experienced a serious or chronic illness or injury in their family in the last year, an enormous 91 percent are satisfied with their care, and 86 percent are satisfied with their coverage.
ABCNEWS.com : U.S. Health Care Concerns Increase

So, as the healthcare debate unfolds, and ObamaCare is clearly losing, where do you stand? Offer the ObamaCare plan sans the aspects that would force Americans into it, or offer the plan in the marketplace of ideas and bow to the wishes of the majority?

Here is a chance to choose democracy or totalism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How about you research the survival rates for every cancer in the US and Canada.

Don't bother, I've already done it:

Circulatory disease deaths per 100,000:
Canada: 219
United States: 265

Original Source: OECD Health Data 2003 and Health Data 2002. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australia's Health 2002

Digestive disease deaths per 100,000:
Canada: 17.4
United States: 20.5

Original Source: World Health Organization

Infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births
Canada: 5.08
United States: 6.3

Original Source: CIA World Factbooks

Intestinal diseases death rate
Canada: 0.3%
United States: 7.3%

Original Source: World Health Organization

Respiratory disease child death rate per 100,000
Canada: 0.62
United States: 40.43

Original Source: World Health Organization

Heart disease deaths per 100,000:
Canada: 94.9
United States: 106.5

Original Source: World Health Organization

HIV deaths per million people:
Canada: 47.423
United States: 48.141

Original Source: CIA World Factbooks

And here's an interesting fact:

Proability of not reaching age 60:
Canada: 9.5%
United States: 12.8%

Original Source: CIA World Factbooks

______________________________________________________________________

The average life span in Canada is 2-3 years longer than the average life span in the United States.

______________________________________________________________________

Per Capita, national health expenditures in the United States are as follows, as of 2007:

Private: $3,991.00
Public: $3,429.00

Source: Dpt of Health and Human Services

_______________________________________________________________________

World health care rankings:

UK: #18
Canada #30
US: #37

Source: World Health Organization

_______________________________________________________________________

Average cost per patient:

USA: $6714.00
Canada: $3678.00
UK: $2760.00

Source: The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

I like the reseach, with these caveats:
My post specified cancer, which becomes more and more prominent as the population ages,
and, two, no data from WHO is acceptable since they they do not compile their own reseach, merely copy what is given by each government.

We have seem similar complaints about Wikipedia for the same reasons, and have to be given a certain amount of credence.

BTW, WHO also uses political components in its 'healthcare' ratings. Check the criteria it uses.

 

[Vast LWC]

I like the reseach, with these caveats:
My post specified cancer, which becomes more and more prominent as the population ages,
and, two, no data from WHO is acceptable since they they do not compile their own reseach, merely copy what is given by each government.

We have seem similar complaints about Wikipedia for the same reasons, and have to be given a certain amount of credence.

BTW, WHO also uses political components in its 'healthcare' ratings. Check the criteria it uses.

Which is why in my next post, I stated the difference in cancer rates.
Because I've seen you raise this point before, and it is a valid argument, that needs to be included.

And yes, it does become more prominent as people age, I agree, but so does heart disease.

As for the WHO data, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree there. I'm much more willing to trust data from an international non-profit agency (that's mostly funded by us mind you), than some agency funded a right-wing think tank like the Heritage Foundation, or something simliar on the left side of the fence.

I try to look for un-biased sources, and honestly, I really can't see a motivation for the countries involved to fudge the data. After all, other countries wouln't stand to profit by the US becoming a nation with socialized medicine, so why would they bother?

 

[Political Junky]

Tommy Douglas is considered the father of Canadian healthcare....

Douglas's number one concern was the creation of Medicare. In the summer of 1962, Saskatchewan became the centre of a hard-fought struggle between the provincial government, the North American medical establishment, and the province's physicians, who brought things to a halt with the 1962 Saskatchewan Doctors' Strike. The doctors believed their best interests were not being met and feared a significant loss of income as well as government interference in medical care decisions even though Douglas agreed that his government would pay the going rate for service that doctors charged. The medical establishment claimed that Douglas would import foreign doctors to make his plan work and used racist images to try to scare the public.Their defenders have also argued that private or government medical insurance plans covered 60 to 63 percent of the Saskatchewan population before Medicare legislation was introduced.

Tommy Douglas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And, in a related story, my favorite endorsement of Canadian healthcare:

[youtube]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3EPd2i4Jshs&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3EPd2i4Jshs&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/youtube]

I'm sure some wingnuts consider this a fair poll. LOL

 

[PoliticalChic]

Tommy Douglas is considered the father of Canadian healthcare....

Douglas's number one concern was the creation of Medicare. In the summer of 1962, Saskatchewan became the centre of a hard-fought struggle between the provincial government, the North American medical establishment, and the province's physicians, who brought things to a halt with the 1962 Saskatchewan Doctors' Strike. The doctors believed their best interests were not being met and feared a significant loss of income as well as government interference in medical care decisions even though Douglas agreed that his government would pay the going rate for service that doctors charged. The medical establishment claimed that Douglas would import foreign doctors to make his plan work and used racist images to try to scare the public.Their defenders have also argued that private or government medical insurance plans covered 60 to 63 percent of the Saskatchewan population before Medicare legislation was introduced.

Tommy Douglas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And, in a related story, my favorite endorsement of Canadian healthcare:

[youtube]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3EPd2i4Jshs&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3EPd2i4Jshs&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/youtube]

I'm sure some wingnuts consider this a fair poll. LOL

"wingnuts" and "lol."

Your elequence is, what, Shakespearian?

 

[Chris]

Most people in America who get cancer are treated by government sponsored healthcare, Medicare.

Thanks for proving my point, Political Chic.

 

[elvis]

Most people in America who get cancer are treated by government sponsored healthcare, Medicare.

Thanks for proving my point, Political Chic.

but let's put in system canada has, where she'd be dead before treatment could start.

 

[Old Rocks]

I hear that a great deal. The problem is not that it's ancedotal, I'll give you some anecdotals too, but the concept of healthcare insurance itself.

It should protect you form the big healthproblem and the losses it causes, such as bankruptcy. If you ask that much smaller group, who has has serious health problems- not co-pay or broken arms, you would get a different response.

"Mountain-bike enthusiast Suzanne Aucoin had to fight more than her Stage IV colon cancer. Her doctor suggested Erbitux—a proven cancer drug that targets cancer cells exclusively, unlike conventional chemotherapies that more crudely kill all fast-growing cells in the body—and Aucoin went to a clinic to begin treatment. But if Erbitux offered hope, Aucoin’s insurance didn’t: she received one inscrutable form letter after another, rejecting her claim for reimbursement. Yet another example of the callous hand of managed care, depriving someone of needed medical help, right? Guess again. Erbitux is standard treatment, covered by insurance companies—in the United States. Aucoin lives in Ontario, Canada.

Rick Baker helps people, and sometimes even saves lives. He describes a man who had a seizure and received a diagnosis of epilepsy. Dissatisfied with the opinion—he had no family history of epilepsy, but he did have constant headaches and nausea, which aren’t usually seen in the disorder—the man requested an MRI. The government told him that the wait would be four and a half months. So he went to Baker, who arranged to have the MRI done within 24 hours—and who, after the test discovered a brain tumor, arranged surgery within a few weeks.

Timely Medical Alternatives, has helped—people like the elderly woman who needed vascular surgery for a major artery in her abdomen and was promised prompt care by one of the most senior bureaucrats in the government, who never called back. “Her doctor told her she’s going to die,” Baker remembers. So Timely got her surgery in a couple of days, in Washington State. Then there was the eight-year-old badly in need of a procedure to help correct her deafness. After watching her surgery get bumped three times, her parents called Timely.
The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care by David Gratzer, City Journal Summer 2007

Holmes (see video below) was diagnosed with brain cancer, with her vision deteriorating rapidly, but was placed on the treatment waiting lists common to health care in socialist countries. While the average wait time for many procedures can run 18 months or more, Holmes actually made out pretty good by only having to wait 6 months for surgery for her brain tumor.
Rather than wait like a good little subject, she came to the States and got the health care she needed within three weeks. You know, the United States health care system liberals claim is so broken it must be replaced with a government system…you know, kinda like the one in Canada.
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/06/where-can-americans-go-for-treatment-under-govt-health-care/


Minor problem: Canada

Major health problem: get to the US of A!

why don't you google how many people don't recieve certain cancer treatments because they don't have the money. I would rather wait six months to recieve a treatment then not recieve it at all because I couldn't afford it.
I bet you also never hear about people going without needed prescriptions because they can't afford them in canada either.

How about you research the survival rates for every cancer in the US and Canada.

http://www.pnhp.org/single_payer_resources/CAN_Comparison_Sheet.pdf

Cancer Survival
Gorey, K. et al, “An International Comparison of Cancer Survival: Toronto, Ontario and Detroit Metro
Areas,” American Journal of Public Health 87(7):1156-1163 (07/1997)
Contact: Kevin M. Gorey, PhD ([email protected])
Major Findings:
• Low-income Americans (residing in census tracts with a median income of less than $17,800 at the
time of diagnosis) had significantly lower survival rates than higher-income Americans (median
census tract income of $51,500 or more) for 12 of 15 kinds of cancer studied. Canadians had no
such association for any cancer. 1
• Compared with their American counterparts, low-income Canadians had a significant survival
advantage for 13 of the 15 kinds of cancer studied.
• Authors’ conclusion: the advantage that low-income Canadians enjoy in cancer survival is due to
their equitable health system. A single-payer system in the U.S. would likely a comparably equitable
system.

 

[Toro]

Most people in America who get cancer are treated by government sponsored healthcare, Medicare.

Thanks for proving my point, Political Chic.

but let's put in system canada has, where she'd be dead before treatment could start.

I've known several people with cancer in Canada, including family members. Generally, the treatment has been good.

 

[Chris]

Most people in America who get cancer are treated by government sponsored healthcare, Medicare.

Thanks for proving my point, Political Chic.

but let's put in system canada has, where she'd be dead before treatment could start.

I've known several people with cancer in Canada, including family members. Generally, the treatment has been good.

Shhhh.....

Don't tell them the truth.

Let them live in their FoxNews fantasy where America does everything better than all the other countries in the world.

 

[elvis]

but let's put in system canada has, where she'd be dead before treatment could start.

I've known several people with cancer in Canada, including family members. Generally, the treatment has been good.

Shhhh.....

Don't tell them the truth.

Let them live in their FoxNews fantasy where America does everything better than all the other countries in the world.

I don't watch fox news, fuckface.

 

[Vast LWC]

but let's put in system canada has, where she'd be dead before treatment could start.

An interesting hyperbole, but, as was pointed out, statistically this is not the case.

 

[Vast LWC]

I don't watch fox news, fuckface.

I'll call BS on this one. Anyone who makes an inaccurate, hyperbolic statement like the one you made above is almost sure to be either a FoxNews viewer, or a Rush Limbaugh listener.

 

[PoliticalChic]

but let's put in system canada has, where she'd be dead before treatment could start.

I've known several people with cancer in Canada, including family members. Generally, the treatment has been good.

Shhhh.....

Don't tell them the truth.

Let them live in their FoxNews fantasy where America does everything better than all the other countries in the world.

SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.
Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.
"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.
"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."
The Canadian Press: Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada&#39;s doctors

 

[Vast LWC]

I've known several people with cancer in Canada, including family members. Generally, the treatment has been good.

Shhhh.....

Don't tell them the truth.

Let them live in their FoxNews fantasy where America does everything better than all the other countries in the world.

SASKATOON &#8212; The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.
Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.
"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.
"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."
The Canadian Press: Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors

Ahh, but interestingly enough, he decided that Canada's health care system was inferior after he went on a fact finding trip where:

"he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France."

Which means, they are not saying thier health care is inferior to the US...

They are saying their health care is inferior to even more socialized nations.

In fact, in that article, Doig is actually backingn up Mr Obama's point that private health care has a place in a country with a public system, as evidenced here:

In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.

He has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said

 

[PoliticalChic]

Shhhh.....

Don't tell them the truth.

Let them live in their FoxNews fantasy where America does everything better than all the other countries in the world.

SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.
Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.
"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.
"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."
The Canadian Press: Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors

Ahh, but interestingly enough, he decided that Canada's health care system was inferior after he went on a fact finding trip where:

"he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France."

Which means, they are not saying thier health care is inferior to the US...

They are saying their health care is inferior to even more socialized nations.

In fact, in that article, Doig is actually backingn up Mr Obama's point that private health care has a place in a country with a public system, as evidenced here:

In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.

He has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said

You are misreading the article. Whether the epiphany occurred in the EU or on the road to Damascus, the operative part of the sentence was " a critical need to make Canada's health-care system patient-centred."

Get it: less based on bureaucrat commissions, which is the basis of ObamaCare.

The point of the multitude of posts over the last several days has been that the Obama plan is intended to institute a 'public option' that many of us see as a wolf in sheeps clothing,designed to squeeze out public plans.

If you like, I'll go over the surreptitious steps that the Chicago cabal had in mind.

But, if the news is to be believed, the point is moot, as the administration and its allies claim that this will no longer be in the bill.

Therefore, showing weaknesses in plans such as Canada's may be obviated.

One hopes.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The Canadian Press: Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada&#39;s doctors

SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.

Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.

"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."

The pitch for change at the conference is to start with a presentation from Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA, who has said there's a critical need to make Canada's health-care system patient-centred. He will present details from his fact-finding trip to Europe in January, where he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France.

His thoughts on the issue are already clear. Ouellet has been saying since his return that "a health-care revolution has passed us by," that it's possible to make wait lists disappear while maintaining universal coverage and "that competition should be welcomed, not feared."

In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.

He has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said.

Doig says she doesn't know what a proposed "blueprint" toward patient-centred care might look like when the meeting wraps up Wednesday. She'd like to emerge with clear directions about where the association should focus efforts to direct change over the next few years. She also wants to see short-term, medium-term and long-term goals laid out.

"A short-term achievable goal would be to accelerate the process of getting electronic medical records into physicians' offices," she said. "That's one I think ought to be a priority and ought to be achievable."

A long-term goal would be getting health systems "talking to each other," so information can be quickly shared to help patients.

Doig, who has had a full-time family practice in Saskatoon for 30 years, acknowledges that when physicians have talked about changing the health-care system in the past, they've been accused of wanting an American-style structure. She insists that's not the case.

"It's not about choosing between an American system or a Canadian system," said Doig. "The whole thing is about looking at what other people do."

"That's called looking at the evidence, looking at how care is delivered and how care is paid for all around us (and) then saying 'Well, OK, that's good information. How do we make all of that work in the Canadian context? What do the Canadian people want?' "

Doig says there are some "very good things" about Canada's health-care system, but she points out that many people have stories about times when things didn't go well for them or their family.

"(Canadians) have to understand that the system that we have right now - if it keeps on going without change - is not sustainable," said Doig.

"They have to look at the evidence that's being presented and will be presented at (the meeting) and realize what Canada's doctors are trying to tell you, that you can get better care than what you're getting and we all have to participate in the discussion around how do we do that and of course how do we pay for it."

so much for the great Canadian health care system

 

[auditor0007]

The Canadian Press: Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors

SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.

Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.

"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."

The pitch for change at the conference is to start with a presentation from Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA, who has said there's a critical need to make Canada's health-care system patient-centred. He will present details from his fact-finding trip to Europe in January, where he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France.

His thoughts on the issue are already clear. Ouellet has been saying since his return that "a health-care revolution has passed us by," that it's possible to make wait lists disappear while maintaining universal coverage and "that competition should be welcomed, not feared."

In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.

He has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said.

Doig says she doesn't know what a proposed "blueprint" toward patient-centred care might look like when the meeting wraps up Wednesday. She'd like to emerge with clear directions about where the association should focus efforts to direct change over the next few years. She also wants to see short-term, medium-term and long-term goals laid out.

"A short-term achievable goal would be to accelerate the process of getting electronic medical records into physicians' offices," she said. "That's one I think ought to be a priority and ought to be achievable."

A long-term goal would be getting health systems "talking to each other," so information can be quickly shared to help patients.

Doig, who has had a full-time family practice in Saskatoon for 30 years, acknowledges that when physicians have talked about changing the health-care system in the past, they've been accused of wanting an American-style structure. She insists that's not the case.

"It's not about choosing between an American system or a Canadian system," said Doig. "The whole thing is about looking at what other people do."

"That's called looking at the evidence, looking at how care is delivered and how care is paid for all around us (and) then saying 'Well, OK, that's good information. How do we make all of that work in the Canadian context? What do the Canadian people want?' "

Doig says there are some "very good things" about Canada's health-care system, but she points out that many people have stories about times when things didn't go well for them or their family.

"(Canadians) have to understand that the system that we have right now - if it keeps on going without change - is not sustainable," said Doig.

"They have to look at the evidence that's being presented and will be presented at (the meeting) and realize what Canada's doctors are trying to tell you, that you can get better care than what you're getting and we all have to participate in the discussion around how do we do that and of course how do we pay for it."

so much for the great Canadian health care system

I will admit that the Canadian system has some big problems. Considering that they only spend half of what we do in the US, this is very understandable. Maybe they should increase revenues a bit to address their cost issues. They could increase spending by 50% and still pay a lot less than we do. Of course, they will need to collect more and that is an argument that must be made to the people of Canada. Healthcare isn't free, but Canadians can have great healthcare with their current system if they pay for it, and they can do so while keeping it much cheaper than it is in the US.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Canadian Press: Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors

SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.

Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.

"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."

The pitch for change at the conference is to start with a presentation from Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA, who has said there's a critical need to make Canada's health-care system patient-centred. He will present details from his fact-finding trip to Europe in January, where he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France.

His thoughts on the issue are already clear. Ouellet has been saying since his return that "a health-care revolution has passed us by," that it's possible to make wait lists disappear while maintaining universal coverage and "that competition should be welcomed, not feared."

In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.

He has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said.

Doig says she doesn't know what a proposed "blueprint" toward patient-centred care might look like when the meeting wraps up Wednesday. She'd like to emerge with clear directions about where the association should focus efforts to direct change over the next few years. She also wants to see short-term, medium-term and long-term goals laid out.

"A short-term achievable goal would be to accelerate the process of getting electronic medical records into physicians' offices," she said. "That's one I think ought to be a priority and ought to be achievable."

A long-term goal would be getting health systems "talking to each other," so information can be quickly shared to help patients.

Doig, who has had a full-time family practice in Saskatoon for 30 years, acknowledges that when physicians have talked about changing the health-care system in the past, they've been accused of wanting an American-style structure. She insists that's not the case.

"It's not about choosing between an American system or a Canadian system," said Doig. "The whole thing is about looking at what other people do."

"That's called looking at the evidence, looking at how care is delivered and how care is paid for all around us (and) then saying 'Well, OK, that's good information. How do we make all of that work in the Canadian context? What do the Canadian people want?' "

Doig says there are some "very good things" about Canada's health-care system, but she points out that many people have stories about times when things didn't go well for them or their family.

"(Canadians) have to understand that the system that we have right now - if it keeps on going without change - is not sustainable," said Doig.

"They have to look at the evidence that's being presented and will be presented at (the meeting) and realize what Canada's doctors are trying to tell you, that you can get better care than what you're getting and we all have to participate in the discussion around how do we do that and of course how do we pay for it."

so much for the great Canadian health care system

I will admit that the Canadian system has some big problems. Considering that they only spend half of what we do in the US, this is very understandable. Maybe they should increase revenues a bit to address their cost issues. They could increase spending by 50% and still pay a lot less than we do. Of course, they will need to collect more and that is an argument that must be made to the people of Canada. Healthcare isn't free, but Canadians can have great healthcare with their current system if they pay for it, and they can do so while keeping it much cheaper than it is in the US.

"The U.S., then, seems to be paying far more to insure a smaller share of its population—to be paying more for less.
There are several flaws in this reasoning, first and foremost its claim that a dollar spent is a dollar wasted. America’s health-care sector is larger partly because, unlike Canada’s, it includes for-profit corporations. Consider the benefit: companies invest billions each year developing innovative, life-saving drugs and devices. Are these expenses really something to lament? Similarly, is it a disadvantage that the U.S. has 11 percent more practicing doctors per capita than Canada? Or 15 percent more nurses? Is it a problem that the United States has almost four times as many MRI scanners per capita as Canada does, or that we preventively test more of our population for common cancers? Hardly. The fact that America’s health-care system is larger, more advanced, and better staffed than a system with rationed care is an advantage. To pretend otherwise is just a tactic to make the reform pill easier to swallow."
Bigger Is Healthier by David Gratzer, City Journal 22 July 2009