Canadian Healthcare Better than US - OECD

[Toro]

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.

Canadian Health Care, Even With Queues, Bests U.S. (Update1) - Bloomberg.com

 

[IanC]

While many Canadians are happy with their healthcare, we dont want the US to go to a public system that will invariably cause rationing and waiting lists. We like having the option of being able to pay for better and faster service across the border.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Then go with a two-tier system like the Aussies.

 

[Political Junky]

While many Canadians are happy with their healthcare, we dont want the US to go to a public system that will invariably cause rationing and waiting lists. We like having the option of being able to pay for better and faster service across the border.

The study appears to put those fears to rest.

 

[oreo]

While many Canadians are happy with their healthcare, we dont want the US to go to a public system that will invariably cause rationing and waiting lists. We like having the option of being able to pay for better and faster service across the border.

The study appears to put those fears to rest.

While the report may--talk to some Canadians--I have. Surgeries that Americans are used to getting done within a week--are scheduled way out in Canada. A woman with breast cancer waited 3 months to have the tumor removed. In the states it's almost immediately.

Plus we have an estimated 30 million with out health insurance. We don't have the doctors or nurses to handle that many additional people. Therefore--waiting will turn into the norm--if this option passes.

I don't know why government just doesn't turn this over to the individual states? It's ridiculous--& health insurance should be a state problem--not a federal government one.--

 

[Modbert]

I loved how Oreo turned to the usual tactics to say Health Care Reform is bad. I also noticed how few to none Republicans posted on this otherwise, not surprised.

 

[oreo]

I loved how Oreo turned to the usual tactics to say Health Care Reform is bad. I also noticed how few to none Republicans posted on this otherwise, not surprised.

First of all I never stated that--don't put words into my mouth. I above most on this board understand the soaring cost of health care insurance. My husband & I pay $825.00 PER MONTH for a high deductible policy.

I don't BELIEVE that our federal government is capable of lowering costs.

They have absolutely no track record of handleing our tax dollars efficiency. In fact, Barack Obama has stated "repeatedly" that there are billions of fraud each year in Medicare. I agree that there is.

So why is it that you would want to give the federal goverment more money-when they can't even get the fraud out of medicare?

 

[Modbert]

First of all I never stated that--don't put words into my mouth. I above most on this board understand the soaring cost of health care insurance. My husband & I pay $825.00 PER MONTH for a high deductible policy.

I don't BELIEVE that our federal government is capable of lowering costs.

They have absolutely no track record of handleing our tax dollars efficiency. In fact, Barack Obama has stated "repeatedly" that there are billions of fraud each year in Medicare. I agree that there is.

So why is it that you would want to give the federal goverment more money-when they can't even get the fraud out of medicare?

Fair enough if that is your argument. However, saying Government is the problem and doing nothing to fix it won't solve anything. As much as one would like to think this is a state issue, notice how all of the states happen to be in major debt. My home state is one of the five worst in the countries so I know all too well about that.

If you look at the Health Care Industry right now, what they need is more doctors and nurses. I can tell you as this economy has gotten bleaker, that has been more and more of a job that people flock too. So while at the moment, there is a lack of nurses and doctors. Down the road, that might not be necessary true.

Trust me, I'm not saying that it's easy to put 30 million new people onto getting health care suddenly but it's not impossible. You also have to look at the fact that plenty of those 30 million people already go to doctors, etc except they just can't afford the insurance for when they do go.

 

[oreo]

First of all I never stated that--don't put words into my mouth. I above most on this board understand the soaring cost of health care insurance. My husband & I pay $825.00 PER MONTH for a high deductible policy.

I don't BELIEVE that our federal government is capable of lowering costs.

They have absolutely no track record of handleing our tax dollars efficiency. In fact, Barack Obama has stated "repeatedly" that there are billions of fraud each year in Medicare. I agree that there is.

So why is it that you would want to give the federal goverment more money-when they can't even get the fraud out of medicare?

Fair enough if that is your argument. However, saying Government is the problem and doing nothing to fix it won't solve anything. As much as one would like to think this is a state issue, notice how all of the states happen to be in major debt. My home state is one of the five worst in the countries so I know all too well about that.

If you look at the Health Care Industry right now, what they need is more doctors and nurses. I can tell you as this economy has gotten bleaker, that has been more and more of a job that people flock too. So while at the moment, there is a lack of nurses and doctors. Down the road, that might not be necessary true.

Trust me, I'm not saying that it's easy to put 30 million new people onto getting health care suddenly but it's not impossible. You also have to look at the fact that plenty of those 30 million people already go to doctors, etc except they just can't afford the insurance for when they do go.

Sure states are having problems right now--we are in a severe recession. However,--states that have balanced budget amendments in them are fairing much better. They make cuts to balance their budgets. Something the federal governement has never done. They operate off of a no limit credit card with future generations names on it for re-payment.

My ideas are:

1. Serious tort reform to lower the cost of insurance to doctors.
2. I would like to see Nurse practitioners in every pharmacy in this country--where people can go in for common colds & flu's-& pay a small fee & get a prescription written right there. We have to keep these people out of our hospital emergency rooms.
3. Open up interstate competition between private medical insurance companies. Competition always works to lower costs.
4. MANDATE--that all who can afford medical insurance for themselves pay for it--if they do not receive it from their employers. This is a MUST & something I completely agree with Obama on.

The above legislation can be done with a signature from Congress & the President--& absolutely no need for take-over.

 

[Modbert]

Sure states are having problems right now--we are in a severe recession. However,--states that have balanced budget amendments in them are fairing much better. They make cuts to balance their budgets. Something the federal governement has never done. They operate off of a no limit credit card with future generations names on it for re-payment.

My ideas are:

1. Serious tort reform to lower the cost of insurance to doctors.
2. I would like to see Nurse practitioners in every pharmacy in this country--where people can go in for common colds & flu's-& pay a small fee & get a prescription written right there. We have to keep these people out of our hospital emergency rooms.
3. Open up interstate competition between private medical insurance companies. Competition always works to lower costs.
4. MANDATE--that all who can afford medical insurance for themselves pay for it--if they do not receive it from their employers. This is a MUST & something I completely agree with Obama on.

The above legislation can be done with a signature from Congress & the President--& absolutely no need for take-over.

Those cuts that you refer to are people losing their jobs. The Government doesn't do this because they wouldn't dare cut some of their more wasteful jobs. If you think Health Care is a bad place where we taxpayers get attacked in waste, the Military is another. We're not getting our bang for our buck by any means. Especially when we somehow can't afford body armor for our troops.

While I like your ideas, somewhat. Heres my thoughts on them.

1.) Sure, but Tort Reform is only 2% of the problem. It would definitely help, but not a issue solver.

2.) Good idea, that would definitely help things and an idea I haven't seen offered yet.

3.) While I like to think that, competition does not lower costs. Best example? The current Health Insurance companies. Plenty of competition as time goes on, yet more money. Though I'm sure their profits going up over 400% in the last 7 years may or may not have something to do with it. However, if done correctly, I'd accept it.

4.) This is where we disagree sort of. Where do you draw the line at being able to "afford it"? Is there a poverty line #? Is there a # in general? While i don't think mandating is the right way to go, I would like to see some program in place where people who want insurance at a more affordable rate can do so. May it be non-profit or whatever.

What you missed out on:

5.) Eliminating Pre-Existing Conditions, if you look at some of my prior threads, you'll see my list of pre-existing conditions. Many of which are completely wrong, which is why they need to be eliminated. There's also the process of being cut from your insurance company for no good which also needs to be eliminated.

And to be honest there are various other things. However, based on above, I think we can agree on all that no?

 

[Toro]

While the report may--talk to some Canadians--I have. Surgeries that Americans are used to getting done within a week--are scheduled way out in Canada. A woman with breast cancer waited 3 months to have the tumor removed. In the states it's almost immediately.

That is rare. Most women with breast cancer have their tumours removed within a few weeks.

A friend of mine had multiple myeloma. When he was diagnosed, he was in the hospital the next day.

In Canada, emergency procedures generally occur as fast as in America. Where Canada is poor is in elective or nonemergency procedures. That is what can take months.

 

[Zander]

Good for Canada.

Personally, I don't trust the US government when it comes to reform of anything. They have a track record that requires a "willful suspension of belief" to buy into their promises. The only difference between a bag of shit and government promises is the bag.

What has the government successfully "reformed" in the last 40 years? They talk about "reform" a lot. But does it ever happen? Seriously,can you name anything that they have reformed?

In fact, I can't think of anything they are really effective at... besides overspending. I served in the military, it was rife with fraud, waste and abuse on every level. We paid hundreds of dollars for O-rings that I could buy for a quarter! Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid have massive unfunded liabilities that threaten our financial stability. Agencies like FHA, Fannie and Freddie , US Postal service, FEMA,, everyone of these operations stink. Do you really want these incompetent boobs in charge of your health? I don't.


I guess I must be a racist.

 

[oreo]

Sure states are having problems right now--we are in a severe recession. However,--states that have balanced budget amendments in them are fairing much better. They make cuts to balance their budgets. Something the federal governement has never done. They operate off of a no limit credit card with future generations names on it for re-payment.

My ideas are:

1. Serious tort reform to lower the cost of insurance to doctors.
2. I would like to see Nurse practitioners in every pharmacy in this country--where people can go in for common colds & flu's-& pay a small fee & get a prescription written right there. We have to keep these people out of our hospital emergency rooms.
3. Open up interstate competition between private medical insurance companies. Competition always works to lower costs.
4. MANDATE--that all who can afford medical insurance for themselves pay for it--if they do not receive it from their employers. This is a MUST & something I completely agree with Obama on.

The above legislation can be done with a signature from Congress & the President--& absolutely no need for take-over.

Those cuts that you refer to are people losing their jobs. The Government doesn't do this because they wouldn't dare cut some of their more wasteful jobs. If you think Health Care is a bad place where we taxpayers get attacked in waste, the Military is another. We're not getting our bang for our buck by any means. Especially when we somehow can't afford body armor for our troops.

While I like your ideas, somewhat. Heres my thoughts on them.

1.) Sure, but Tort Reform is only 2% of the problem. It would definitely help, but not a issue solver.

2.) Good idea, that would definitely help things and an idea I haven't seen offered yet.

3.) While I like to think that, competition does not lower costs. Best example? The current Health Insurance companies. Plenty of competition as time goes on, yet more money. Though I'm sure their profits going up over 400% in the last 7 years may or may not have something to do with it. However, if done correctly, I'd accept it.

4.) This is where we disagree sort of. Where do you draw the line at being able to "afford it"? Is there a poverty line #? Is there a # in general? While i don't think mandating is the right way to go, I would like to see some program in place where people who want insurance at a more affordable rate can do so. May it be non-profit or whatever.

What you missed out on:

5.) Eliminating Pre-Existing Conditions, if you look at some of my prior threads, you'll see my list of pre-existing conditions. Many of which are completely wrong, which is why they need to be eliminated. There's also the process of being cut from your insurance company for no good which also needs to be eliminated.

And to be honest there are various other things. However, based on above, I think we can agree on all that no?

In my state of Colorado--the state added $3.00 per month to every premium to offer afforable insurance rates to people with pre-existing conditions. Other states can do the same.

On the issue of Tort reform--when a 6 doctor office pays approx. 500K per year for mal practice insurance--that's huge. This is unnecessary--& also think about doctors who do order unnecessary testing--just in order to do a CYA on the next mal practice suit.

Competition always lowers costs. Remember the 1st computer you bought? Mine was a floppy disc computer--no hard drive--& the price tag was around $2000.00 Today you can buy a new laptop--that does everything for around $500.00. "Competition did that." Right now, Anthem Blue Cross--Blue Shield basically owns my state. Therefore, they can charge whatever they want.

From what I understand--it's the federal government who has stopped medical insurance companies from competing state to state.

Government can easily regulate all the problems you addressed--without doing a take-over of it. Personally, I just don't believe that our federal government is capable of running a lemonaid stand without driving it into bankrupsty.

 

[Luissa]

I haven't met a canadian yet that didn't like their health care and where I work I meet a lot of them.