SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Orcastraiter who wrote (11233)7/12/2004 10:30:12 PM
From: miraje  Respond to of 90947
 
Canada has a great health care system.

That's pretty funny. Have you taken posting lessons from AS??

Canadian Health Care Is No Model for U.S.

Claims That Canada's Single-Payer Health System Is More Efficient or More Compassionate than Ours Are Just Plain Untrue
Written By: Jay Lehr, Ph.D.
Published In: Health Care News
Publication Date: June 1, 2004
Publisher: The Heartland Institute and The Galan Institute

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When one travels through Canada, as I regularly do, one cannot help but enter into frequent discussions on the pros and cons of health care in Canada versus the United States. The quiet, self-effacing Canadians cautiously vent their discontent with a system that, while apparently free for the individual citizen, comes with many drawbacks.

From a health standpoint, the Canadian system's greatest failing is the unconscionable delay citizens must accept to obtain serious medical procedures. From an economic perspective, the costs of the system are extravagantly higher than reported by the government's suspect accounting system.

Hidden Costs

Pierre Lemieux, an economist at The University of Quebec, wrote in the April 23, 2004 issue of the Wall Street Journal, "The Canadian system is built around a compulsory public insurance regime that provides most medical and hospital services free." Lemieux adds that the system is not, of course, free for the Canadian taxpayer. Twenty-two percent of all taxes raised in Canada are spent on its health care system.

Last August, the New England Journal of Medicine reported health care spending absorbs only 10 percent of the Canadian gross domestic product, compared to 14 percent of U.S. GDP. The Journal credited Canada with being more efficient in the application of administrative costs--but the real difference is explained by the fact that U.S. citizens are permitted to pay privately for health care services, while such spending does not take place in Canada. In Canada, it is illegal to seek or convey private medical assistance.

Canadian health insurance is compulsory, monopolistic, and administered by the various provincial governments under strict control of the federal government. It is illegal for a Canadian citizen to carry private insurance coverage for any health care services covered by the government. Physicians are told by the government how much they can charge for their services; drug prices are set by the government. The supply of medical services in Canada is completely rationed, with no significant private alternative.

The alleged "low cost" of Canadian health care is thus no less a fraud than it was in the Soviet Union. Canadians may not pay the price in dollar terms ... but they pay a steep price indeed in terms of care denied or delayed and the poor quality of service provided by unhappy medical practitioners whose incomes do not match their skill and training.

Take a Number and Wait

Long waiting lines are the worst flaw in the system. The Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank, calculated in 2003 the average Canadian waited more than four months for treatment by a specialist once the referral was made by a general practitioner. According to the Fraser Institute's work, the shortest median wait was 6.1 weeks for oncology (cancer) treatment without radiation. In some provinces, neurosurgery patients waited more than a year. A simple MRI requires, on average, a three-month wait in Canada.

Long waits for critical care are an uncalculated cost of the Canadian health care system. A price tag could easily be calculated by determining how much patients would be willing to pay to reduce or eliminate these waiting times. We do this calculation on a regular basis in the United States in determining the charges for all services provided. In the U.S., we choose to pay higher prices in order to get more immediate care; in Canada, patients have no choice but to wait.

Three-Tier System

My own personal contacts with Canadians support a recent article in the Montreal Gazette, in which a Canadian woman described the frequent rudeness of unionized Canadian medical staff as compared to the "kindness, discretion, and professionalism" of staff members in U.S. hospitals. Few Canadians can afford to experience health care in the U.S. and thus make this comparison.

In his Wall Street Journal article, Lemieux quotes Professor Livio Di Matteo of Lakehead University in Ontario describing a three-tier system of health care in Canada. The very rich, DiMatteo pointed out, can go to the U.S. for rapid, personalized, high-tech treatment. A second tier, consisting of well-informed, aggressive Canadians, knows how to navigate the government system to gain every possible advantage, like getting to the head of the queue.

The third tier are the unconnected citizens, who make up the vast majority of patients in the Canadian health care system. They must suffer the slings and arrows of a system notoriously oblivious to anguish, discomfort, humiliation, and other affronts perpetrated by unfeeling bureaucrats on patients whose pain is most definitely not felt by those in charge.

A Quebec physician, Dr. Jacques Chanoulli, is suing the Canadian government for not allowing patients to pay for better care. The Supreme Court of Canada will hear the case in June. At the same time, 10,000 breast cancer patients who had to wait an average of eight weeks for post-operative radiation treatments over the past seven years have brought a class action suit against Quebec's hospitals.

Free-Market Alternatives

The demand for better health care has spurred innovation in Canada and overseas.

Two Indian nations, for example, are planning to build private hospitals on tribal lands, where the Canadian government's laws do not apply.

Private hospital companies in India are seeing tens of thousands of patients a year from outside that country's borders. The largest of these firms, Apollo Hospital Enterprises Ltd., has seen 60,000 foreign patients in the past three years. Terry Salo, a Canadian resident of Victoria, British Columbia, availed himself of hip replacement in Madras, India after waiting more than a year for the "free" service in his home province.

Similarly, Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore have taken the lead in the field of "medical tourism," supplying low-cost, high-quality procedures to more than 600,000 patients in 2003. An article in the May 3 issue of the Chicago Tribune reported Poland's entry into the field, encouraging travelers to seek out lower-cost dental care while visiting Poland.

Kerry Would Clone it

What is happening in Canada and other countries with socialist health care systems is relevant to the current political debate in the U.S.

Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies for the Cato Institute, reported on the group's Web site that Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry's health insurance proposals amount to sweeping socialization of the U.S. health care system.

That ought to alarm Americans, who should have no interest in seeing their health care deteriorate to the level of Canada's "free" system.

heartland.org



To: Orcastraiter who wrote (11233)7/12/2004 11:21:26 PM
From: Selectric II  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
Canada has a great health care system. Most of Europe does too.

Yeah, in Canada you can die waiting in line for surgery.
Looks like it hasn't changed a bit since I was in the UK in '78 and people told me the same thing. You live in a dream world, sharkfin soup.

Sleek private clinics slip from Health Act scrutiny

By ROD MICKLEBURGH
From Monday's Globe and Mail

Vancouver — With its spacious waiting room, wide corridors, gleaming wood floors and the latest in high-tech operating rooms, the Cambie Surgery Centre whispers wealth from every corner.

Brian Day, the centre's resolute 57-year-old medical director, says his sleek private facility is flush enough to finance a multimillion-dollar expansion that doubled its operating capacity from three rooms to six.

This is no sprawling public hospital like Vancouver General Hospital a few blocks away, where, according to Dr. Day, rats can be seen running underneath “the derelict buildings.”

Much of the Cambie Centre's income comes from privately paid-for procedures that seem to fly in the face of the Canada Health Act.

And with premiers due to meet later this month to discuss a common front on their fight with Ottawa for control of the health-care agenda, the role of private facilities such as the Cambie Centre is coming under fierce scrutiny.

A growing number of patients are bypassing long waiting lists at public hospitals to have surgery done here. The centre charges set fees for these operations, including profit margins of about 30 per cent.

Under the Canada Health Act, however, this is not supposed to happen. With few exceptions, the act does not permit private payment for services that would otherwise be covered by medicare. No buying one's way to the head of the queue.

Yet so far, no one has said boo about what goes on at Dr. Day's facility, even after a bruising election campaign in which all three major parties vowed to quash the slightest hint of two-tier, for-profit medicine creeping into Canadian medicare.

Dr. Day is a passionate advocate of two-tier health care, with parallel public and private systems, provided all Canadians are covered by some form of health insurance. Competition, he vows, will wipe out waiting lists in Canada as it has in Europe.

He is one of a number of private-clinic operators to intervene in last month's landmark case at the Supreme Court of Canada that challenged the Canada Health Act's ban on patients purchasing their own health care.

Dr. Day said about 3 per cent to 5 per cent of the centre's business comes from patients wanting speedy, privately funded operations without having to wait in the public system.

They do so by taking advantage of a perceived legal loophole. While the Canada Health Act prevents patients from paying for their own medically necessary care, Dr. Day believes the act does permit third parties to pay.

He referred to a young elite soccer player whose lucrative scholarship to a United States university was jeopardized by a knee injury.

The public system could not do the prescribed operation quickly enough, so she was operated on at the Cambie Surgery Centre, Dr. Day said. A family member picked up the tab. Another patient, diagnosed with a malignancy in both breasts, decided not to wait the eight weeks doctors told her it would take for an operation to remove them.

She came here, and a relative paid for it,” Dr. Day said. “She did not want to go to bed every night thinking that maybe the cancer was spreading.”

Despite this apparent flouting of the Canada Health Act, neither the B.C. nor federal government have tried to stop it.

“We believe we are within the law for one simple reason,” Dr. Day said. “It is clearly unconstitutional for any government to promise to deliver health care, fail to deliver it, and then take legal action to stop you from getting it yourself when they fail to deliver it. Let's go to court and fight that battle. Of course, governments don't want to do that.”

Dr. Day said patients who opt for privately funded operations are usually not rich.

“The wealthy have always gone to the United States,” he said. “These are people who decide: ‘I want to keep playing hockey and I'm going to spend $2,000 on my knee operation instead of going on vacation.' Those are the kinds of people that we typically see. It's happening more and more.”

At the same time, another Canada Health Act anomaly provides nearly half the centre's yearly patient load (about 3,500).

These patients are injured workers who need surgery. Their operations are paid for by the Workers' Compensation Board. A fee goes to the surgeon for each procedure and a second fee goes to the centre, which provides nurses and operating time.

“Eighty per cent of injured workers in B.C. that need surgery are treated in under 20 days. It puts unions on the spot,” Dr. Day said.

“They are against us in theory and principle, but in practice, they see their members getting treatment. Why can't the rest of the population have the same privilege?”

In his final report, former federal medicare commissioner Roy Romanow called for an end to favoured treatment of WCB patients. Few believe the recommendation will be acted upon.

In Toronto, health-policy expert and author Michael Rachlis said government should take on Dr. Day's clinic. “There is nothing in the Canada Health Act that says it's okay for third parties to pay. But so many people seem to believe it, it's become like an urban myth,” Dr. Rachlis said.



To: Orcastraiter who wrote (11233)7/15/2004 2:49:25 AM
From: Selectric II  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
Dang. It sounds to me like you'd be a lot happier in Canada or Europe, where they already have these benefits. You wouldn't have to engage in all this terrible haggling and incessant whining on the internet just to get the health care that you're entitled to. Here, we like it the way it is, despite its faults.

Move there. Good luck. Bon voyage.



To: Orcastraiter who wrote (11233)7/15/2004 3:01:33 PM
From: Lazarus_Long  Respond to of 90947
 
Canada has a great health care system. Most of Europe does too.
Ah, I think Canada has been quite adequately addressed by myself and others. Europe too.

Those with expensive crappy healthcare insurance
Sorry to hear yours is so bad. Mine isn't. Oh, and it's private insurance.

Employers are being over charged for healthcare premiums because the insurer needs to have a profit,
And they're being overcharged for 8 1/2 X 11 bond paper because the paper companies have to make a profit. And for steel because the steel companies have to make a profit. And for ....

Why don't we just nationalize the entire economy and it can all be efficient? Like the Soviet Union was.

Business will benefit from an across the board healthcare system from lower premiums. Some may see a slight increase in taxes
Slight?

Let's take YOUR 50% not-covered and use it. That would be, say 70 million people. Let's put the cost of good coverage at $1000 a month average- -$12,000 a year.

That works out to $840 BILLION a year. Federal tax receipts this year are estimated at $2T. To cover that would require a 40% increase in taxes. Hardly slight.