American Health Care vs Canadian

[Lionsjunkie 1]

Just posting this "opinion" for some debate

 

T minus 3-2-1 and voila, Recliner Whiner drops by

 

It may take you a little longer to get in for "non-life threatening" issues in Canada but it sure don't cost us our arm and our leg

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/opinion/...tml?_r=2&em

 

This Time, We Won’t Scare

 

Published: June 10, 2009

 

Perhaps you’ve seen those television commercials denouncing health care reform as a plot to create a Canadian-style totalitarian nightmare, and you feel a wee bit scared.

 

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Nicholas D. Kristof

 

Back in the election campaign, some people spread rumors that Barack Obama might be a secret Muslim conspiring to impose Sharia law on us. That seems unlikely now, but what if he’s a covert Canadian plotting to impose ... health care?

 

Rick Scott, a former hospital company chief executive, leads a group called Conservatives for Patients’ Rights. He was forced to resign as C.E.O. after his company defrauded the government through overbilling and is now spending his time trying to block meaningful health care reform by terrifying us with commercials of “real-life stories of the victims of government-run health care.”

 

So here’s a far more representative “real-life story.”

 

Diane Tucker, 59, is an American lawyer who moved to Vancouver, Canada, in 2006. Like everyone else there, she now pays the equivalent of just $49 a month for health care.

 

Then one day two years ago, Ms. Tucker was working on her office computer when she noticed that she was having trouble typing with her right hand.

 

“I realized my hand was numb, so I tried to stand up to shake it out,” she remembered. “But I had trouble standing.”

 

A colleague called 911, and an ambulance rushed her to the nearest hospital.

 

“An emergency room doctor met me at the door, and they took me straight upstairs to the CT scan,” she recalled. A neurologist explained that she had suffered a stroke.

 

Ms. Tucker spent a week at the hospital. “The doctors were great, although there were also a couple of jerks,” she said. “The nursing staff was wonderful.”

 

Still, there were two patients to a room, and conditions weren’t as opulent as at some American hospitals. “The food was horrible,” she said.

 

Then again, the price was right. “They never spoke to me about money,” she said. “Not when I checked in, and not when I left.”

 

Scaremongers emphasize the waits for specialists in Canada, and there’s some truth to the stories. After the stroke, Ms. Tucker needed to make a routine appointment with a neurologist and an ophthalmologist to see if she should drive again. Initially, those appointments would have meant a two- or three-month wait, although in the end she managed to arrange them more quickly.

 

Ms. Tucker underwent three months of rehabilitation, including physical therapy several times a week. Again there was no charge, no co-payment.

 

Then, last year, Ms. Tucker fainted while on a visit to San Francisco, and an ambulance rushed her to the nearest hospital. But this was in the United States, so the person meeting her at the emergency room door wasn’t a doctor.

 

“The first person I saw was a lady with a computer,” she said, “asking me how I intended to pay the bill.” Ms. Tucker did, in fact, have insurance, but she was told she would have to pay herself and seek reimbursement.

 

Nothing was seriously wrong, and the hospital discharged her after five hours. The bill came to $8,789.29.

 

Ms. Tucker has since lost her job in the recession, but she says she’s stuck in Canada — because if she goes back to the United States, she will pay a fortune for private health insurance because of her history of a stroke. “I’m trying to find another job here,” she said. “I want to stay here because of medical insurance.”

 

Another advantage of the Canadian system, she says, is that it emphasizes preventive care. When a friend was diagnosed as being pre-diabetic, he was put in a free two-year program emphasizing an improved diet and lifestyle — and he emerged as no longer being prone to diabetes.

 

If Ms. Tucker’s story surprises you, you should know that Mr. Scott’s public relations initiative against health reform is led by the same firm that orchestrated the “Swift boat campaign” against Senator John Kerry in 2004. These commercials are just as false, for President Obama is not proposing government-run health care — just a public insurance element in the mix.

 

No doubt there are some genuine horror stories in Canada, as there are here in the United States.

 

But the bottom line is that America’s health care system spends nearly twice as much per person as Canada’s (building the wealth of hospital tycoons like Mr. Scott). Yet our infant mortality rate is 40 percent higher than Canada’s, and American mothers are 57 percent more likely to die in childbirth than Canadian ones.

 

In 1993, the “Harry and Louise” commercials frightened Americans into abandoning health reform. Let’s ensure those scare tactics don’t work this time.

 

 

 

 

[pimptastic69 0]

That's a great story.

 

Do Canadians also come up with their own drugs, or do they depend on companies in other countries to do that?

 

Also, do they allow ambulance chasers in Canada? How about when a doctor focks up - can you sue the doctor or are you stuck fighting City Hall?

[Strike 3,980]

That stuff is pretty much a load of crap, and I didn't even read the article. Looks like it is just an opinion piece short on FACTS. Do a google search on Grand Junction CO and health care. You'll find that they have some of the lowest cost and highest quality health care in the country. Also, do a search on Mcallen Texas. Specifically look for a New Yorker article from last week that investigated why McAllen has the highest health care costs in the country. See, the things Obama and congress are considering in the name of "health care reform" are not the things causing health care costs to be so high. If the rest of the country were to institute just the concepts that Grand Junction has been using for the last 30 years, not even the methods they go to achieving it, we wouldn't even be discussing nationalizing health care. Oh, and BTW, as we speak Canada is in the process of moving their system to having some levels of privatization. If a government run system is so great why are they moving the other direction? Oh, and if what congress is proposing is so great how come the AMA came out against it today?

[GettnHuge 1]

Oh, and if what congress is proposing is so great how come the AMA came out against it today?

 

The AMA believes and rightly so that once you have the 'free' gov't plan, nobody nor their employers will stick with anything

private, the system will be flooded and the price tag will be astronomical. They'll need to set up queuing for the lines that will

show up. For every success story in canada or england or australia and so on, there are dozens of horror stories. Once the

gov't gets its hands on setting prices for doctors, like everywhere else, they'll be working harder for much less. I mentioned

here before, a guy I met who while in australia a few years ago broke his thumb and went to the ER, after waiting in line for

6 hours they told him it would be a few more hours, so he just left. Too many ppl here are idiots. They will be down at the ER

or doctor for every sniffle, scrape, bruise and cough. Canada's system costs 250Billion for 30million people...so how much

will 300million ppl cost? Keep in mind our tax revenues last year were under 3trillion.

[pimptastic69 0]

Why would any smart person want to take on a hundred thousand dollars in school loans right now going through medical school? It's not a stretch right now to imagine Gov't placing limits on the amount of money that can be charged per procedure. So, if you were a bright young mind just getting out of high school, thinking about becoming a doctor, why in the world would you want to enter this area?

[Strike 3,980]

Why would any smart person want to take on a hundred thousand dollars in school loans right now going through medical school? It's not a stretch right now to imagine Gov't placing limits on the amount of money that can be charged per procedure. So, if you were a bright young mind just getting out of high school, thinking about becoming a doctor, why in the world would you want to enter this area?

 

Medstudent, you're on call!!!!

 

[FeelingMN 273]

That stuff is pretty much a load of crap, and I didn't even read the article. Looks like it is just an opinion piece short on FACTS. Do a google search on Grand Junction CO and health care. You'll find that they have some of the lowest cost and highest quality health care in the country. Also, do a search on Mcallen Texas. Specifically look for a New Yorker article from last week that investigated why McAllen has the highest health care costs in the country. See, the things Obama and congress are considering in the name of "health care reform" are not the things causing health care costs to be so high. If the rest of the country were to institute just the concepts that Grand Junction has been using for the last 30 years, not even the methods they go to achieving it, we wouldn't even be discussing nationalizing health care. Oh, and BTW, as we speak Canada is in the process of moving their system to having some levels of privatization. If a government run system is so great why are they moving the other direction? Oh, and if what congress is proposing is so great how come the AMA came out against it today?

 

I read up on the Grand Junction model. Seems pretty reasonable:

 

Five years ago, the Independent Physicians Association and Rocky Mountain Health Plans in Grand Junction laid down $500,000 apiece as seed money to form a physicians network called Quality Health Network, which was described in The New Yorker article.

 

It’s created a culture of collaboration, Pramenko said, and an environment that has found a compromise between a “single-payer” system and a “free market” system.

 

Now is the time, Pramenko said, to share what’s working here while it’s in the forefront of the national discussion.

 

“You use the article to keep pressing folks who are writing policy as we speak,” he said. “These ideas have merit. They’re proven ideas that have been working for 30 years.”

 

ErkenBrack said he’s been pushing Grand Junction’s approach on statewide level for years.

 

“Time and again I’ve said this is how we do things in western Colorado,” he said. “It’s been clear to us that this is a very good model.”

 

But ErkenBrack said that it takes more than other communities just writing a plan down on paper.

 

It takes buy-in from insurance providers, medical providers and every other entity involved in the delivery and payment of health care services.

 

It’s not uncommon, he said, for leaders of different local agencies to serve on boards of other agencies in the health care community.

 

“It’s not just convenient,” he said. “It makes us invested in each other’s success.”

 

http://www.gjfreepress.com/article/2009060...;parentprofile=

 

 

In Colorado, we haven’t waited on Washington. We’ve made real progress in showing how to provide high quality health care at a lower cost. Last week, the New Yorker magazine published an article entitled “The Cost Conundrum” that highlights the important work that’s been done in Mesa County, Colorado. Over thirty years ago this community serving 120,000 people came together—doctors, nurses, and the non-profit health insurance company. They agreed upon a system that paid doctors and nurses for seeing patients and producing better quality care. They realized that problems and costs go down when care is more patient-focused.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/...08/daily85.html

 

 

And therein lies the problem: health insurance is way too lucrative for this particular model to work on a national scale.

 

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/for.../223/index.html

 

 

[Strike 3,980]

I read up on the Grand Junction model. Seems pretty reasonable:

http://www.gjfreepress.com/article/2009060...;parentprofile=

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/...08/daily85.html

And therein lies the problem: health insurance is way too lucrative for this particular model to work on a national scale.

 

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/for.../223/index.html

 

You have to read the article about McAllen as well. You have to understand what is driving costs up. The proposals coming from congress and Obama do not address the REAL problems we have. They just take control of the system. As I said in my first post, I don't expect other communities to implement the same solutions Grand Junction, which is a small mountain community, did. But the concepts apply whether you're talking about for profit or not for profit. And they address the things that are actually driving costs up as opposed to the crap our government is peddling.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Another big difference between Canada and Sweden and places like that and the U.S. that will make it very hard for universal health care to work here is demographics.

 

Canada and Sweden are small (comparatively) homogenous, well educated populations. They don't have Messicans and african americans and meth riddled rednecks having 14 kids.

[Lionsjunkie 1]

Another big difference between Canada and Sweden and places like that and the U.S. that will make it very hard for universal health care to work here is demographics.

 

Canada and Sweden are small (comparatively) homogenous, well educated populations. They don't have Messicans and african americans and meth riddled rednecks having 14 kids.

 

Good point...the only african american we have in Windsor are the thugs that come from Detroit and shoot up downtown Windsor

 

 

[posty 2,296]

And what might happen if there is government run health plans...

 

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12857

 

Eugene, Ore., Jun 6, 2008 / 01:09 am (CNA).- An Oregon woman suffering from lung cancer was notified by the state-run Oregon Health Plan that their policy would not cover her life-extending cancer drug, telling her the health plan would cover doctor-assisted suicide instead.

 

Barbara Wagener discovered her lung cancer had recurred last month, the Register-Guard said. Her oncologist prescribed a drug called Tarceva, which could slow the cancer growth and extend her life.

 

The Oregon Health Plan notified Wagner that it would not cover the drug, but it would cover palliative care, which it said included assisted suicide.

 

“Treatment of advanced cancer that is meant to prolong life, or change the course of this disease, is not a covered benefit of the Oregon Health Plan,” said the letter Wagner received from LIPA, the Eugene company that administers the Oregon Health Plan in Lane County.

 

“I think it’s messed up,” Wagner said. She said she was particularly upset because the letter said doctor-assisted suicide would be covered.

 

“To say to someone, we’ll pay for you to die, but not pay for you to live, it’s cruel,” she said. “I get angry. Who do they think they are?”

 

A doctor appealed to Genentech, the company that markets Tarceva in the U.S., to cover Wagner’s medication. On Monday Wagner was told the company would cover the drug treatment for a year, after which she could re-apply for the drug.

 

“I am just so thrilled,” Wagner said. “I am so relieved and so happy.”

 

According to the Register-Guard, Oregon oncologists say they have seen a change in state health policy, saying their Oregon Health Plan patients with advanced cancer are no longer covered for chemotherapy if it is considered comfort care.

 

“It doesn’t adhere to the standards of care set out in the oncology community,” said Dr. John Caton, an oncologist at Willamette Valley Cancer Center. He said many studies have found that chemotherapy in a palliative setting decreases pain and time spent in the hospital and increases quality of life.

 

Officials of LIPA and the state Health Services Commission, which sets policy for the Oregon Health Plan, say they have not changed their coverage of recurrent cancer patients, but have only clarified the rules.

[dolfan06 1]

Yes I would agree the American health care system is totally so simple that we can identify, measure and correct the "problems" with it through the sharing of anecdotes!

[phillybear 364]

Yes I would agree the American health care system is totally so simple that we can identify, measure and correct the "problems" with it through the sharing of anecdotes!

 

We might have cared what you had to say back in 2006, but not now. You're old news, muffin.

[dolfan06 1]

We might have cared what you had to say back in 2006, but not now. You're old news, muffin.

 

But I love you.

[phillybear 364]

But I love you.

 

Yeah, well, you broke my heart when you said that you didn't want to be choke focked anymore.

[Blitzen 0]

Unless she's making very little money and paying very little in taxes, I doubt very very much that only $50 per month of her taxes are going to health care. If I remember correctly, paying for health care in my province takes about 40% of all tax revenues.

 

Health care - whether private or public - is very expensive. I don't think we'll be able to keep affording the current public health care system. I think I read somewhere that, in very few years, health care and public education combined will need 85% of our taxes to keep going. Ain't gonna happen. Politicians are just postponing the bad news. Then when the population really ages, they'll have to make cuts across the board

 

As far as Sweden is concerned, I believe that the current administration is much more conservative in its views than those of the past.

[Lionsjunkie 1]

Americans Who've Used Canada's Health-Care System Respond to Current Big-Lie Media Campaign

 

 

The scare ads and op-ed pieces featuring Canadians telling us American how terrible their government health-care systems have arrived - predictably.

 

There's another, factual view - by those of us Americans who've lived in Canada and used their system.

 

My wife and I did for years, and we've been incensed by the lies we've heard back here in the U.S. about Canada's supposedly broken system.

 

It's not broken - and what's more, Canadians like and fiercely defend it.

 

Example: Our son was born at Montreal's Royal Victoria Hospital. My wife got excellent care. The total bill for three days in a semi-private room? $21.

 

My friend Art Finley is a West Virginia native who lives in Vancouver.

 

"I'm 82, and in excellent health," he told me this week. "It costs me all of $57 a month for health care, and it's excellent. I'm so tired of all the lies and bullshit I hear about the system up here in the U.S. media."

Finley, a well-known TV and radio host for years in San Francisco, adds,

 

"I now have 20/20 vision thanks to Canadian eye doctors. And I haven't had to wait for my surgeries, either."

 

A Canadian-born doctor wrote a hit piece for Wingnut Central (the Wall Street Journal op-ed page) this week David Gratzer claimed:

 

"Everyone in Canada is covered by a single payer -- the government. But Canadians wait for practically any procedure or diagnostic test or specialist consultation in the public system."

Vancouverite Finley: "That's sheer b.s."

 

I heard Gratzer say the same thing on Seattle radio station KIRO this week. Trouble is, it's nonsense.

 

We were always seen promptly by our doctors in Montreal, many of whom spoke both French and English.

 

Today, we live within sight of the Canadian border in Washington state, and still spend lots of time in Canada.

 

Five years ago, while we were on vacation in lovely Nova Scotia, the Canadian government released a long-awaited major report from a federal commission studying the Canadian single-payer system. We were listening to CBC Radio the day the big study came out.

 

The study's conclusion: While the system had flaws, none was so serious it couldn't be fixed.

 

Then the CBC opened the lines to callers across Canada.

 

Here it comes, I thought. The usual talk-show torrent of complaints and anger about the report's findings.

 

I wish Americans could have heard this revealing show.

 

For the next two hours, scores of Canadians called from across that vast country, from Newfoundland to British Columbia.

 

Not one said he or she would change the system. Every single one defended it vigorously.

 

The Greatest Canadian Ever

 

Further proof:

 

Not long ago, the CBC asked Canadians to nominate and then vote for The Greatest Canadian in history. Thousands responded.

 

The winner? Not Wayne Gretzky, as I expected (although the hockey great DID make the Top 10). Not even Alexander Graham Bell, another finalist.

 

The greatest Canadian ever?

 

Tommy Douglas.

 

Who? Tommy Douglas was a Canadian politician - and the father of Canadian universal health care.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mann/am...a_b_215256.html

 

 

 

Canadian Health Care >>> American Health Care

[DAVID RUFFIN 1]

That stuff is pretty much a load of crap, and I didn't even read the article. Looks like it is just an opinion piece short on FACTS. Do a google search on Grand Junction CO and health care. You'll find that they have some of the lowest cost and highest quality health care in the country. Also, do a search on Mcallen Texas. Specifically look for a New Yorker article from last week that investigated why McAllen has the highest health care costs in the country. See, the things Obama and congress are considering in the name of "health care reform" are not the things causing health care costs to be so high. If the rest of the country were to institute just the concepts that Grand Junction has been using for the last 30 years, not even the methods they go to achieving it, we wouldn't even be discussing nationalizing health care. Oh, and BTW, as we speak Canada is in the process of moving their system to having some levels of privatization. If a government run system is so great why are they moving the other direction? Oh, and if what congress is proposing is so great how come the AMA came out against it today?

 

That stuff is pretty much a load of crap, and I didn't even read the article.

[redtodd 7]

I think a sample size of one is enough to form an opinion.