Canada’s health care system

[Oddball]

Not every hospital in the country is the Mayo Clinic, that's true, but that doesn't mean all the ones that aren't are crap. I honestly can't imagine where you twits got the idea that all poor people in America are forced to go the equivalent of Guadalajara General Hospital.

Mayo and Massachusetts General are for the eeeeevvvvilllll "rich people".

The Medical Marxists aren't interested in making every hospital the best.... They're into equality and unformity in mediocrity and lack.

 

[Vast LWC]

And as for the Cancer survival rates thing, I have pointed this out in multiple threads preceding this one, but...

...In overall surviability rates for all diseases, Canada beats the US hands down. Here are some examples:

It has been pointed out that the United State has better survival rates than Canada in cancer victims. This is true, by about 3-4%, it would seem.

Much ado has been made in the Right-Wing media and on these boards about this fact, and it has been held up as an example of their opinion that US Health Care is better than Canadian health care.

Well, Cancer is just one disease. It is a leading cause of death, but not THE leading cause of death. So let's look at comparisons in other diseases, shall we?

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 birthsCanada: 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 100,000Canada: 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

 

[Vast LWC]

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

Source: World Health Organization

And notice the differences in health care costs here:

Not to mention,

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

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

As can be seen here

Source: Dpt of Health and Human Services

 

[veritas]

Not every hospital in the country is the Mayo Clinic, that's true, but that doesn't mean all the ones that aren't are crap. I honestly can't imagine where you twits got the idea that all poor people in America are forced to go the equivalent of Guadalajara General Hospital.

Mayo and Massachusetts General are for the eeeeevvvvilllll "rich people".

The Medical Marxists aren't interested in making every hospital the best.... They're into equality and unformity in mediocrity and lack.

I don't know about that at all. Here in MD we have so many good hospitals and we would include those in DC too, since the cities are so close, and mediocrity is the opposite of what goes on here. I think the database would help it along even further. Comparative analysis could indicate which hospitals have the best outcomes for certain services......and the worst, so things could be improved. This could work in a regional setting as well as suggest an exchange program where we trade doctors and administrators so that they can benefit from overall exposure to more productive environments. Patients and doctors could select certain hospitals best suited to particular procedures.

 

[Chris]

Remind me again, which country did ailing multimillionaire Ted Kennedy go to for treatment? Was it Canada?

He supposedly dedicated his live to health care so his choice when it came to his own treatment speaks volumes, no?

Kennedy paid for the best and he got the best but what about those who do not have the money he did?

Not every hospital in the country is the Mayo Clinic, that's true, but that doesn't mean all the ones that aren't are crap. I honestly can't imagine where you twits got the idea that all poor people in America are forced to go the equivalent of Guadalajara General Hospital.

Because some of actually know some poor people.

 

[Chris]

Not every hospital in the country is the Mayo Clinic, that's true, but that doesn't mean all the ones that aren't are crap. I honestly can't imagine where you twits got the idea that all poor people in America are forced to go the equivalent of Guadalajara General Hospital.

Mayo and Massachusetts General are for the eeeeevvvvilllll "rich people".

The Medical Marxists aren't interested in making every hospital the best.... They're into equality and unformity in mediocrity and lack.

We already have national health insurance, it's called Medicare.

 

[AllieBaba]

And as for the Cancer survival rates thing, I have pointed this out in multiple threads preceding this one, but...

...In overall surviability rates for all diseases, Canada beats the US hands down. Here are some examples:

It has been pointed out that the United State has better survival rates than Canada in cancer victims. This is true, by about 3-4%, it would seem.

Much ado has been made in the Right-Wing media and on these boards about this fact, and it has been held up as an example of their opinion that US Health Care is better than Canadian health care.

Well, Cancer is just one disease. It is a leading cause of death, but not THE leading cause of death. So let's look at comparisons in other diseases, shall we?

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 birthsCanada: 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 100,000Canada: 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

Those stats have a lot to do with the immigrants we have who come infested with parasites, advanced, untreated diseases etc. and so on.

 

[Political Junky]

All could be solved if Medicare coverage was extended from 65 year olds to birth.

 

[Oddball]

Not every hospital in the country is the Mayo Clinic, that's true, but that doesn't mean all the ones that aren't are crap. I honestly can't imagine where you twits got the idea that all poor people in America are forced to go the equivalent of Guadalajara General Hospital.

Mayo and Massachusetts General are for the eeeeevvvvilllll "rich people".

The Medical Marxists aren't interested in making every hospital the best.... They're into equality and unformity in mediocrity and lack.

We already have national health insurance, it's called Medicare.

Yaeh...And you apparently haven't received the memo that it's bankrupt.

But I guess therer is still room in steerage on the Titanic, huh??

 

[Chris]

All could be solved if Medicare coverage was extended from 65 year olds to birth.

I agree, but we need more than that.

I would like to see us mirror our system after the French system.

Limit medical liablity, make medical schools free, and don't pay doctors ridiculous salaries. And lower the price of drugs by negotiating the price with the drug companies.

 

[Chris]

Mayo and Massachusetts General are for the eeeeevvvvilllll "rich people".

The Medical Marxists aren't interested in making every hospital the best.... They're into equality and unformity in mediocrity and lack.

We already have national health insurance, it's called Medicare.

Yaeh...And you apparently haven't received the memo that it's bankrupt.

But I guess therer is still room in steerage on the Titanic, huh??

It's not bankrupt.

Nice lie though.

 

[Oddball]

Yeah...And apparently every credible accouting bureaucracy in D.C. -including the CBO- are lying too, Mr. hack-in-the-box dipshit lemming.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Rather than respond to the original post of the thread, which I'll just say is... less than accurate in it's details despite getting the very general big picture about right, I'm going to begin with responding to this:

I shall reference, again:

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Yes, by all means let's quote a couple studies of a few isolated cancer mortality statistics and then pretend it's representative of overall health care system performance.

Since one of the truest measures of the quality of a healthcare system is how it performs on life-threatening ailments - as opposed to trying to measure it by things it has no real control over, like life expectancy and infant mortality - I'd say talking about cancer survival rates is a very good representation of the quality of American health care.

But if you'd like to look at some other measure of effectiveness, how about this: The vaunted WHO health care ranking report of 2000, so beloved and quoted by leftists, ranks the United States number one in responsiveness. For those of you so busy crowing over the conglomerate scores that you missed this little factoid, "responsiveness" refers to choice of provider, dignity, autonomy, timely care, and confidentiality.

So not only are we doing best at keeping people with life-threatening illnesses alive, but we're also doing best at treating them like people.

Or... not (apparently posting functioning urls isn't permitted to me yet, so anyone who wants to look at the below, get rid of the spaces):

A systematic review of studies comparing health outcomes in Canada and the United States | Guyatt | Array

That is a systematic review of DOZENS of scientific studies of comparative treatment outcomes in Canada and the United States. It looks at everything from cancer to coronary artery disease to chronic illnesses to surgical procedures.

And Canada achieves superior results in the clear majority of them.

Well, since I had never heard of "Open Medicine", and I know that one can find people on the Internet to say pretty much anything, I had to go research your source. Does it seem at all suspicious to anyone else that the editorial board members of this spiffy new medical journal just happen to have formerly belonged to the editorial board of the Canadian Medical Association Journal?

Of course, I'm a little skeptical about anything that has to tell me three or four times on the first page that it's "systematic". Who are they trying to convince?

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.

...

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.

Even if true, much good it appears to be doing. See first point.

What, that we have better survival rates?

Oh boy...

1. "Self reporting" a subjective "level" of personal health is incredibly unreliable. It depends completely on what every single individual respondent's personal definition of "good" or "poor" or "excellent" is.

So is self-reporting satisfaction with your health care system, but strangely, that never stops leftists from prattling on about how happy Canadians, Britons, etc. are with whatever it is they have. In fact, since the French have indicated on many polls that they would be happy to accept lower-quality care in favor of having everyone universally covered, I think I'm MORE interested in self-reported good health and good results than I am in self-reported system satisfaction.

2. American seniors? You mean... THOSE PEOPLE ON MEDICARE? You seriously want to go there for a talking point on why universal government run Canadian style insurance is scary? The high level of self reported health of people in the US on... government provided universal insurance coverage????

Right now, Medicare and its patients get to access the medical system produced by largely by the HMO system and its patients. Therefore, it doesn't change the fact that Americans get good medical care, OR the fact that that would no longer apply if EVERYONE had the equivalent of Medicare.

The author of that particular talking point either wasn't thinking things through when he wrote that, or was betting on his readers not thinking. Probably not a bad bet on average really...

You mean as opposed to the people who tell us how wonderful it is that we have Medicare and Medicaid, and in the next breath tell us how we're letting poor people die in the gutters like flies?

Kindly show me REAL wait time data for the US, then we'll talk.

And that means no pretending all the people in the US effectively *indefinitely* wait listed by being priced out of the system (or at least wait listed until they turn 65 and qualify for medicare) don't exist so you can celebrate how short "average" wait times are for everyone else are, which is what every single wait time statistic I've ever seen published for the United States does.

How about YOU show us REAL data for people being "indefinitely wait-listed by being priced out of the system"? Oh, hell, how about you show us real data for people not able to get any medical care at all? That's what "priced out of the system" is, right?

If Canada and Britain just didn't count all the people in their systems waiting the longest they'd come up with much better wait time stats too you know.

If you're planning to contend that the US is cooking the books on this subject, you need to put your statistics where your mouth is before demanding that someone ELSE argue against your assertion.

People in other countries want to improve their health care systems? Good god, I'm floored.

Just like I was when I heard that ::gasp:: Americans bitch about their health care sometimes. But somehow, THAT means that the whole system sucks and should be totally replaced.

Oh, btw:

http : //www .harrisdecima.com/en/downloads/pdf/news_releases/071009E.pdf

You were saying? (Question 2 is particularly fun)

One, you really need to learn to include these little references more effectively. Two, who the hell are these people, and why am I supposed to care? Three, didn't we just get done discussing how self-identification was kinda meaningless?

While having lots of MRIs is nice... having them is only beneficial to people who can actually use them. A rather large chunk of the American population would need to place themselves in significant financial distress or bankrupt themselves to do that in the current system.

I know a country that has waiting lists for MRIs running into months isn't snarkily talking about whether or not AMERICANS get to use THEIRS. How beneficial are YOUR scanty numbers of these machines to Canadian citizens who have to schedule their injuries months in advance if they want to use them?

And once again, if you're going to come in here making assertions about us just letting people die in droves with no medical care, you'd best be ready to back it up.

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13]

Which of course is all because of the insurance companies... those breeding grounds of groundbreaking medical research! Why, I've simply lost track of how many amazing medical breakthroughs the insurance companies have brought us!

That wasn't even a good try at deflection. I don't recall it being said that it was due to insurance companies, so you've got a hell of a nerve trying to pretend it was because you don't want to answer the REAL point, which is that it's because we still have vestiges of a free market, which allow the companies that DO produce groundbreaking research to make a profit off of it, encouraging them to make even more, rather than just giving it up and going into another line of work.

Disingenuous. Bad way to start out.

No, seriously, totally lost track. Ummm, can you maybe share an example with me? Just to job my memory you understand.

It's "jog" your memory.

As for examples, pharmaceuticals are by far the most-used method of treatment for illnesses and injuries. The United States, because it doesn't have governmental price controls on pharmaceuticals the way every other industrialized nation does, ends up underwriting the costs for everyone else. Were we to adopt a system like Canada's, the drug companies that currently look to us to pay for their R & D would simply stop developing new drugs.

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

http : //www .commonwealthfund.org/Content/Charts/Testimony/Insurance-Design-Matters-Underinsured-Trends-Health-and-Financial-Risks-and-Principles-for-Reform/Mortality-Amenable-to-Health-Care.aspx

http : // graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/07/09/business/econgraphic2.jpg

http : // graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/07/09/business/econgraphic3.jpg

http : // puck.sourceoecd.org/vl=2895417/cl=23/nw=1/rpsv/factbook2009/images/graphics/10-02-01-g1.gif

Ummm, no. No it doesn't.

BTW, would everyone do me a favor and pay close attention to that last chart? Particularly the red part of the bars? That's TAX spending on health care.

Look at how high the US is.

Now look at how high Canada is.

Then don't let me hear anything about how Canadian style health care means super high taxes please. It's stunning how many Americans don't know the facts on that one.

Well, gloryosky. If we had a medal for throwing up random graphs with no context or explanation whatsoever, you'd be a shoo-in for it. Other than that, what's your frigging point?

Tax spending? What does that mean, precisely? Does it, by any chance, refer to the percentage of the individual citizen's income that goes to taxes? Or does it refer to the percentage of its tax revenue the government then spends on health care? Is it too much to ask that you at least ATTEMPT to give us some point of reference whereby we can figure out what you're talking about?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Since when do you have a right to the services of another and at the expense of everyone else??

Since about the time the first government taxed it's first citizens to provide services for the collective society.

So...since a really, really long time ago if we're going to be that general.

I'd suggest being more specific if you want to start arguing what rights do and do not, or should and should not, exist.

Uh, no. There's a big difference between taxes to pay for the government itself and things like roads and infrastructure, and taxes to hand out goodies to individuals. If you can show me where our government was taxing people for personal handouts "a really, really long time ago", please do.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And as for the Cancer survival rates thing, I have pointed this out in multiple threads preceding this one, but...

...In overall surviability rates for all diseases, Canada beats the US hands down. Here are some examples:

It has been pointed out that the United State has better survival rates than Canada in cancer victims. This is true, by about 3-4%, it would seem.

Much ado has been made in the Right-Wing media and on these boards about this fact, and it has been held up as an example of their opinion that US Health Care is better than Canadian health care.

Well, Cancer is just one disease. It is a leading cause of death, but not THE leading cause of death. So let's look at comparisons in other diseases, shall we?

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 birthsCanada: 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 100,000Canada: 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

And as I've pointed out in virtually all of those threads, you're full of shit, misrepresenting statistics, and out-and-out lying.

So here we are again.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Source: World Health Organization

And notice the differences in health care costs here:

Not to mention,

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

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

As can be seen here

Source: Dpt of Health and Human Services

In addition, none of that has shit to do with the quality of the medical system in question, any more than it did the other numerous times you tried these lies.

 

[Oddball]

Since when do you have a right to the services of another and at the expense of everyone else??

Since about the time the first government taxed it's first citizens to provide services for the collective society.

So...since a really, really long time ago if we're going to be that general.

I'd suggest being more specific if you want to start arguing what rights do and do not, or should and should not, exist.

I asked you first and got a platitudinous vagary.

Since when does any right impose an obligation upon someone else to perform, so someone else may have that "right"??

Please cite specifics.

 

[Chris]

Yeah...And apparently every credible accouting bureaucracy in D.C. -including the CBO- are lying too, Mr. hack-in-the-box dipshit lemming.

I figured you'd respond with some high school insult.

 

[Oddball]

You wanna accuse people of being liars that's what you're going to get, you ignorant fuckface.

Now that we have that out of the way, debunk the CBO numbers that show Medicare/Medicaid as basically bankrupt, shithead.

 

[Chris]

You wanna accuse people of being liars that's what you're going to get, you ignorant fuckface.

Now that we have that out of the way, debunk the CBO numbers that show Medicare/Medicaid as basically bankrupt, shithead.

You are starting to remind me of Glenn Beck.

Sputtering spittle and little else.