Health Care BS

Comments 15

1. Marc Brown wrote:

   How many Americans wait for treatment, and how many are going abroad for affordable healthcare?

   Posted 04 Sep 2007 at 3:24 am ¶
2. DrRich wrote:

   Canadians, and other peoples more civilized than we are, can afford to be smug about their “rational” healthcare systems to at least some extent because the “irrational” American healthcare system exists. Their richer citizens can come here for care, thus decompressing what otherwise might be a powerful voice for change. Non-American companies can invent healthcare products, knowing that a market exists for selling those products at a profit - it exists here. Most importantly, American ingenuity percolates to other nations over time (often at famously discounted prices), so there is indeed continued medical progress in countries like Canada. It’s just that this progress is subsidized by the American taxpayer.

   If the great American engine of healthcare progress should finally fail (by, say, adopting a Canadian-like system), healthcare will change radically not only here, but all over the world.

   -DrRich
   -GUTHealthcare.com
   -CovertRationingBlog.com

   Posted 04 Sep 2007 at 7:30 am ¶
3. Marc Brown wrote:

   ‘Non-American companies can invent healthcare products, knowing that a market exists for selling those products at a profit - it exists here. ‘

   Er, a market to sell healthcare products exists everywhere. The US is of course one of the biggest markets, but overconsumes many things.

   Posted 04 Sep 2007 at 9:54 am ¶
4. Jayson Martineau wrote:

   Just talked about this in my graduate class. I agree Canada has issues about health care but I know that we don’t get turned away because we don’t have coverage or can’t afford the procedure. We also don’t abandon the dieing like the USA. We fully treat all patients even when cases are deemed to be terminal. A classic example in the USA is the woman from Seatle that is trying to marry a Canadian so she can get treatment for her cancer because her insurance won’t cover it. You must also acknowledge that your place on a waiting list is determined by your level of need.

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 5:51 pm ¶
5. Frustrated Canuck wrote:

   Canadians are denied treatment. My mother was denied treatment for a severe infection. I believe treatment was denied based on her age, she was 70. Her infection got into her blood stream and even showed up on a blood scan, although, she actually saw various doctors with the exception of one none of the others treated her. One started her on antibiotics. Another took her off antibiotics. She was sick for six months and afterwards was never the same. What good is a healthcare system that is not there when people need it the most? Canada is not the perfect system, people die waiting for care, people are denied care, we often wait months and even years to see a doctor if we live long enough, and so-called elective surgeries which may be more serious than “true” elective cases can take weeks, months and in some cases years to obtain. Some people have died on waiting lists for cardiac surgery. The Canadian system stinks.

   Posted 30 Jan 2008 at 8:36 pm ¶
6. Ed wrote:

   I get a kick out of what Martineau wrote. “We also don’t abandon the dieing like the USA. We fully treat all patients even when cases are deemed to be terminal.”

   That’s downright funny. Denying patient’s care is exactly (down to the last detail) what Canada’s health care does on a daily basis. Martineau needs to change his statement claiming that Canada has a government that SAYS it wants to help the needy and dying. In truth, it is one of the least compassionate systems in the world. It doesn’t matter how much money you have, you’re still probably going to die waiting for the treatment you don’t have to pay for.

   And then Canadians are going to tell me this is “compassionate”

   Go figure.

   Posted 19 Feb 2008 at 3:28 pm ¶
7. Jeff Gannon wrote:

   I find it sickening that Americans have the gall to point fingers at the Canadian healthcare system. Not only is it superior in almost everyway - it works. Sure, of course it is not infallable - what system is? Of course people die waiting for treatment - but that isn’t because the system failed them - other factors are present. Everyone can’t use the same equipment at the same time - that is only logical - regardless of where you live - there are always going to be more patients than doctors/hospitals/available equipment. This is not a Canadian healthcare issue - it would be the same in ANY country regardless of the system in place. So to say that Canadians are dying waiting for treatment is a stretch of the truth without including the necessary facts to understand why. The system is not to blame - it works fine - not perfect, but again - which system is? The fact is - there are alot of sick and injured people out there and the Canadian system itself does not turn anyone away. Like waiting in line at McDonalds for your Big Mac - you will get served - but to think that you HAVE to be first in line - and get treatment immediately over the other people that are ahead of you is a ludicrous argument - wait your turn - you WILL get served. Unfortunately, if you die while waiting - your death will only add to the growing number of American HMO’s argument of - “See! The Canadian healthcare system failed another one”
   The fact is these large conglomerate drug companies and HMO don’t want to see a Canadian system adopted - because they know that it is a cashcow for them. Their system of greed and unethical performance would come under scrutiny and indeed be in question under the Canadian model.
   One must keep in mind that in America Insurance companies are fighting over themselves to get your business. They all offer the best service “since sliced bread”, and promise to be there for you when you need them. As we know, that isn’t always the case. Often people are denied on technicalities ranging from denial of treatment due to any number of reasons ranging from experimental, to cosmetic. Often patients are denied the proper insurance to cover many of their ailments because the HMO’s don’t want to make a payout unless they absolutely have no other choice. This is a daily fact of life for many people with health insurance living in America.
   Now one must ask, why would the HMO’s and drug companies stop at nothing - including unfair propaganda touting the ills of the Canadian healthcare model? Well, the answer is really quite simple. Under the Canadian healthcare system - private healthcare from Insurance companies is illegal. It is illegal for a Canadian citizen to seek out an Insurance company and pay for their service.
   Under the Canadian model - all of these private and/or state run insurance companies would go out of business. Considering that their way of life is at stake - it is no wonder that these companies would do and say anything to make the Canadian Healthcare system look flawed and imperfect. They are fighting for survival.
   Understanding this is key to understanding how their mindset works.
   Now you know why they insist that the Canadian system is flawed.

   Posted 05 May 2008 at 6:42 am ¶
8. America wrote:

   I’m sorry Mr. Gannon, but you are wrong. You wrote that shortages would exist in any country regardless of the system that is in place. The basics of a capitalist system is that it encourages competition which is what brings any market into equilibrium (supply=demand). There is not a shortage of doctors or equipment in the US. You rarely hear that people in the United States can’t find a doctor, instead you hear that they can’t afford a doctor. In Canada, even those who can afford a doctor can’t find one and that is because there is no competition in the marketplace because it is all government run. What do you think the government is going to do? Establish a costly system that meets the needs of all citizens, or, establish the cheapest system that covers only the basic needs of citizens. Canadian specialized care is a joke and that is why your system will not last. I know that if my wife were to have complications with her pregnancy she would receive the care she needs right away because our insurance covers all specialized care surrounding a pregnancy. Do you?

   Posted 01 Aug 2008 at 2:24 pm ¶
9. Geir Magnusson wrote:

   Has anyone done an unbiased,honest comparison between the two systems?
   We pay between 7 and 8 thousand dollars per person a year in the US and yet we have a large population uninsured.How do the two populations come out in basic measurements, such a infant mortality, longevity,and other fields? These numbers must be available and they tell a truer story than anecdotes.

   Posted 10 Jan 2009 at 5:37 pm ¶
10. Paul wrote:

    Magnusson, longevity and infant mortality are poor measures of health care because other factors like environment, education, heredity, lifestyle, and income have a much greater effect on them. Also, different nations have surprisingly different criteria for what constitutes infant mortality. A better measure would be mortality rates for diseases that rarely go away on their own and can’t be treated without modern medicine.

    Posted 11 Jan 2009 at 11:59 am ¶
11. Dan Maachini wrote:

    Longevity and infant mortality are poor measures of health care? Listen to yourself!!!

    Posted 06 Mar 2009 at 11:34 am ¶
12. Taylor wrote:

    You hear a lot about how many people die waiting for treatment, what about people dying because they are uninsured?

    Wonder which is higher, per capita?

    Posted 11 May 2009 at 4:21 pm ¶
13. Catron wrote:

    The number is pretty close to zero.

    Posted 11 May 2009 at 7:48 pm ¶
14. Robert Parker wrote:

    It appears that the major problem with the Canadian system is a lack of sufficient infrastructure and numbers of providers to support the demand for health services. Canadians acknowledge these shortcomings, but efforts to increase funding to improve the infrastructure and attract sufficient numbers of providers are opposed routinely because they must be funded through tax increases of some sort. In the USA there is already a considerably better infrastructure. Would that not translate into shorter waiting lists than Canadians experience? My point is why demonize the Canadian system on the grounds of long waiting lists if the same system in the USA would work, given our superior infrastructure? I believe that we can offer decent healthcare to everyone without creating Canada’d waiting lists.

    Posted 14 Jun 2009 at 1:07 pm ¶
15. Gerard Freisinger wrote:

    Writing from the perspective of 40 years as a physician in practice and someone who has been a patient.
    Please read “Phantoms In The Snow” written by Katz and Evans, et al in HEALTH AFFAIRS in 2002. It is a study of the number of Canadians coming to the US for health care. Very few. Not anecdotes but an actual study. We all have anecdotes. I can use them to show how US patients go to India for bypass surgery or Canada for lasik surgery.

    We seem to think a government system with 3% overhead is more expensive than an HMO system with an average of 27% overhead. We seem to think a system which is based on stock holder profit vs patient welfare is ethically superior in the name of capitalism.

    The handwriting has already been written on the downside of so called free enterprise. The banking system and the US auto industry have collapsed and require federal bailout. Pity the poor car dealer who, I believe, was held in the lowest esteem of all professions. Greed was the basis of failure in both the banking and auto industry. Private health insurance is next on the block. Check on the salary and benefits of top wall street CEOs, top auto industry CEOs and top HMO CEOs.

    The nay sayers -Republicans - have little to offer other than sniping. Their philosophy is… “I have mine, #$@^ you”.

    How about social responsibility as number one and greed as number two?

    Posted 24 Jun 2009 at 7:46 am ¶

Post a Comment