Oh (no) Canada...

[amicus]

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/AcuteCoronarySyndrome/18279

As I spent fifteen months at an USA Airbase in Goose Bay, Labrador, and have some small experience in that part of the world....well, it's slim, but still, I had to chuckle at the News of the Canadian Leader of Newfoundland/Labrador, equivalent to a Governor of a State in the US, who is currently in a US Hospital, somewhere, for an undisclosed heart problem for surgery.

And yes, I lifted the "Oh Canada" headline, "Oh, (no) Canada", from the article, wishing I had thought of it...

On the News, Canadian spokepersons (ahem, male & Female) are scurrying to cover the faux pas of why the vaunted Canadian Health care system was snubbed for treatment in the nasty ole USA.

This is just too sweet to let pass...c'mon, Canadian's, I know you are out there, let's hear it!



(who says I don't have a sense of humor?)

Amicus

 

[Stella_Omega]

That's your sense of humor?

That's... funny!

 

[amicus]

I didn't realize you were a Canuck...now I have yet another reason to ignore your haggling gossip.

Amicus

 

[Stella_Omega]

I didn't realize you were a Canuck...now I have yet another reason to ignore your haggling gossip.

Amicus

I am not Canadian.

And nobody is laughing with you, only at you.

 

[TE999]

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/AcuteCoronarySyndrome/18279

As I spent fifteen months at an USA Airbase in Goose Bay, Labrador, and have some small experience in that part of the world....well, it's slim, but still, I had to chuckle at the News of the Canadian Leader of Newfoundland/Labrador, equivalent to a Governor of a State in the US, who is currently in a US Hospital, somewhere, for an undisclosed heart problem for surgery.

And yes, I lifted the "Oh Canada" headline, "Oh, (no) Canada", from the article, wishing I had thought of it...

On the News, Canadian spokepersons (ahem, male & Female) are scurrying to cover the faux pas of why the vaunted Canadian Health care system was snubbed for treatment in the nasty ole USA.

This is just too sweet to let pass...c'mon, Canadian's, I know you are out there, let's hear it!



(who says I don't have a sense of humor?)

Amicus

Aw c'mon, Ami. You and I know the Newfies are always behind the curve on things...you've heard all the Newfie jokes. He didn't understand the health care is superior in the other provinces and he could have gone there instead of relying on the backward, inequitable US health care system. Silly Newfie.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I heard STELLA was Newfie befo she moved away and moved into the clown car.

 

[Handley_Page]

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/AcuteCoronarySyndrome/18279

As I spent fifteen months at an USA Airbase in Goose Bay, Labrador, and have some small experience in that part of the world....well, it's slim, but still, I had to chuckle at the News of the Canadian Leader of Newfoundland/Labrador, equivalent to a Governor of a State in the US, who is currently in a US Hospital, somewhere, for an undisclosed heart problem for surgery.

And yes, I lifted the "Oh Canada" headline, "Oh, (no) Canada", from the article, wishing I had thought of it...

On the News, Canadian spokepersons (ahem, male & Female) are scurrying to cover the faux pas of why the vaunted Canadian Health care system was snubbed for treatment in the nasty ole USA.

This is just too sweet to let pass...c'mon, Canadian's, I know you are out there, let's hear it!



Amicus

We've had similar fun with politicians (and their families) "going private" as opposed to our NHS system. The row lasts about 2 days.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

No one's saying you shouldn't be able to buy the best health care in the world as long as you're wiling to pay for it yourself.

Health care reform is about providing basic care to people who can't afford it on their own.

Obviously, the Gov of Newfoundland is financially set and can go wherever the hell he sweetly pleases. No one in Canada is taking away that right.

The rest of us are not so lucky, and if we don't pass muster by the hospital's financial means committee, we're left to rot.

I don't see what's so fucking gleeful about this.

Deprived of basic medical coverage, people avoid doctors until they're faced with life-threatening situations, at which point they're rushed to the hospital and rack up bills of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. Of course they're unable to pay, and so the hospitals and physicians raise the fees and rates they charge the rest of us in order to cover their losses, and we end up paying a de facto health care tax whether we want to or not.

And I guess all this makes Amicus chortle. Indeed. What fools those Canadians are! To have the best of public and private!

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I suppose one Canadian's coming to the US for mediczl care is news because it's so rare.

Meanwhile, the 300,000 patients who flock to just one Canadian hospital for free hernia repair simply isn't news any more.

I had to look this up to verify that number, and read In Wiki about Shouldice Hospital's appalling nightmarish conditions under "socialized medicine":

====================

Recovery

Unlike many hospitals, Shouldice does not have a "fleet of wheelchairs and gurneys, armies of aides to push them, and banks of wide elevators."[1] Instead, carpeted floors, low-rise stairs and beautiful grounds are available, encouraging activity. The Shouldice property comprises 23 acres (93,000 m2), with a greenhouse, putting green, sunrooms, pool table, stables, and dining hall. The hospital focuses on customer service, without compromising on speedy recovery.

The landscaped grounds, pool table, and putting green are all intended to encourage patients to be mobile following surgery – to take walks in the grounds and to stretch and bend while playing pool or practising putting. Similarly, there are no television sets or telephones in patients' rooms and beds have to be adjusted manually. A daily exercise program is also provided.

Patients are scheduled stay in the hospital for two days and three nights following surgery, although those who recover faster may leave earlier.

All rooms are double occupancy, and regularly flow through patients. The patient rooms have "low capital investment"—with no phone, television, and minimal medical equipment. The double occupancy rooms also provide income from additional charges for semi-private rooms. These mandatory charges are not covered by public health insurance and effectively make the Shouldice an example of the upper tier of two-tier health care – welfare recipients, for example, cannot be referred there.


Follow-up

Shouldice sends out a newsletter to all of its patients. The newsletter includes a questionnaire for Shouldice's post-operative follow-up program. The program is considered the world's largest and longest-running follow-up program. The post-op is gradually transistioning to e-mail, as much as possible.

Shouldice reports that fewer than 1% of patients have a recurrence after hernia repair. This compares to the 10-15% in normal hospitals.[2]

Studies carried out outside Shouldice generally show recurrence rates for "Shouldice repairs" (described above) which are higher than the recurrence rates reported by Shouldice. For example, a French study[3] of 1,706 repairs performed using the Shouldice, Bassini's, and Cooper's ligament repairs found that Shouldice repairs had the lowest recurrence rate, but that the rate was 6.1% after 8.5 years. However, the surgeons performing the repairs in these studies are almost certainly less experienced with this type of repair than Shouldice surgeons. For example, in the French study, fewer repairs were performed over six years than would be performed in about three months at Shouldice.

The disparity between the rates claimed by Shouldice and published rates also may be due in part to differences in the length of the post-surgery period assessed. Shouldice does its first follow-up after 18 months. Yearly follow-ups are conducted after that, but there is doubtless loss of contact with many former patients who have moved. The average period since surgery in Shouldice's data may therefore be shorter than the periods in published studies.

Shouldice holds annual patient reunions, which one year attracted 1500 former patients.

 

[sadangel]

Thank you Dr. M.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

...

Health care reform is about providing basic care to people who can't afford it on their own.

...

That's not what it's about and you of all people should know that.

 

[Pure]

some facts of interest; (besides that rich folks head to the US and Switizerland

for medical care.)

JAMA. 1993 Nov 10;270(18):2207-12.

Actual causes of death in the United States.
McGinnis JM, Foege WH.
US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC 20201.

[...]OBJECTIVE--To identify and quantify the major external (nongenetic) factors that contribute to death in the United States. DATA SOURCES--Articles published between 1977 and 1993 were identified through MEDLINE searches, reference citations, and expert consultation. Government reports and complications of vital statistics and surveillance data were also obtained. STUDY SELECTION--Sources selected were those that were often cited and those that indicated a quantitative assessment of the relative contributions of various factors to mortality and morbidity. [...]

DATA SYNTHESIS--The most prominent contributors to mortality in the United States in 1990 were tobacco (an estimated 400,000 deaths), diet and activity patterns (300,000), alcohol (100,000), microbial agents (90,000), toxic agents (60,000), firearms (35,000), sexual behavior (30,000), motor vehicles (25,000), and illicit use of drugs (20,000).

Socioeconomic status and access to medical care are also important contributors, but difficult to quantify independent of the other factors cited.




==


EDUCATION AND CANCER DEATH RISKS
http://www.dancewithshadows.com/business/pharma/education-cancer.asp

Cancer deaths higher among less educated in US

14 September, 2007
In the United States, less educated people are more than twice as likely to die from cancer as their better-educated counterparts.

A study of people between the ages 25 and 64 found that death from all cancers in 2001 was roughly double in black men, white men, and white women with 12 years or less of education, compared with those with more than 12 years in education.

The risk for less-educated black women was 1.43 times their better-educated peers.

According to the study, published in the online edition of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, cancer deaths were generally higher in blacks compared with whites. But, it also said that education could be a more important factor in determining death risk than race.

The new findings add to a wide body of research on health care disparities on account of socio-economic status and income levels in the United States. Access to health care is one of the hottest topics of debate in the US.

The study report comes on the heels of a new advertising campaign by the American Cancer Society that promotes the politically contentious policy of health care access to all citizens to thwart cancer deaths.

Jessica Albano, lead author of the study and a scientist at the American Cancer Society, said a number of factors could influence the association between education level and cancer death rate, including access to medical care associated with lack of health insurance, the prevalence of exposure to important risk factors such as cigarette smoking and obesity, and the likelihood of utilizing cancer screening.

Black men with 12 years of education or less had a prostate cancer death rate of 10.5 per 100,000, compared with 4.8 for those with more schooling.
A similar pattern, but with a smaller difference, was seen for white men.

The second finding was that breast cancer death rates were higher in less-educated women. This is contrary to a long-standing trend, particularly in white women with more education, where breast cancer risk was often higher, perhaps owing to later child-bearing.

 

[Stella_Omega]

That's not what it's about and you of all people should know that.

That's exactly what it's about, Zeb.

 

[lance gt]

The audacity to make fun of a Province for wanting the best for its people, just shows your ignorance and distain for Canadians, Ami. What you show is jealousy of something that works and you wish you had it so good.

When do you see Canadians making fun of American health care? Most say they wish you did have better standards for everyone and not just tose with money.

Nice to see why Canadians are loved everywhere and the term Ugly American is still prevalent in the minds of people around the world. It's people like you Ami, that perpetuate that.

Proud to be Canadian

 

[amicus]

The number of Canadian's coming to America for medical care is not 'rare', Mab, it is quite common and here is a link that explains why:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...health-care-have-a-wait-problem-46847927.html

There are similar waiting periods, lengthy ones, in Britain also, forcing Brits to pay for national healthcare and then pay to visit a private physician.

Amicus

 

[driphoney]

I suppose one Canadian's coming to the US for mediczl care is news because it's so rare.

Meanwhile, the 300,000 patients who flock to just one Canadian hospital for free hernia repair simply isn't news any more.

I had to look this up to verify that number, and read In Wiki about Shouldice Hospital's appalling nightmarish conditions under "socialized medicine":

Did you really mean that number? 300,000 flocked to the hospital? Or to the site?

Shouldice launched a website in 1995. Over 300,000 visit the site each year; each year 1300 operations are scheduled online, and close to 10,000 emails requesting information are received.

Their ten full-time surgeons perform over 7500 hemiorrhapies each year. The facility, which looks much like a mansion, is purposely comfortable, featuring a 23-acre (9.3 ha) property. The centre is owned by Shouldice Hospital Limited.

Back to our regularly schedule health care flagellation.

 

[TE999]

Providing so-called 'Universal Health Care' to all US citizens is a lofty and noble goal...it will not however raise anyone's levels of intelligence, ability, self-discipline, ambition, aversion to risk taking, resistance to abusing alcohol and drugs, carnality, venality and avoidance of anti-social and/or criminal behavior.

Short version: There's plenty of people who won't avail themselves of health care and/or preventive medicine even if it's offered on every street corner unless they have a sucking chest wound or are bleeding from two or more orfices.

'Universal Health Care' availability will not guarantee a mutually healthier population.

 

[stephen55]

A one person, made in Canada solution....

The number of Canadian's coming to America for medical care is not 'rare', Mab, it is quite common and here is a link that explains why:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...health-care-have-a-wait-problem-46847927.html

There are similar waiting periods, lengthy ones, in Britain also, forcing Brits to pay for national healthcare and then pay to visit a private physician.

Amicus

All governments have problems with providing heath care. It's an expensive commodity. Some governments simply supply little or none. In the USA, rationing is done by making health insurance expensive, to the point a substantial chunk of the population doesn't have it. In Canada, rationing is done by limiting the supply (access to the bigger, more expensive investigations and procedures). At least it was. Things are slowly improving.

You may question if health care should even be considered a commodity in the first place. I certainly do.

The reason that Canada has a problem with not enough doctors of all kinds, and thus, waiting lists, can be traced to one man, Dr. Robert G. Evans PhD, a health care economist at the University of British Columbia. Studies in the early 70's showed that as the number of doctors increased, per capita, the cost of medical services (to the provinces) also increased. Who would of thought? This lead the good Dr. Evans to realize that in health care, unlike commodity economics, supply induces demand. This lead to his brilliant idea that the way to reduce health costs was to reduce the numbers of doctors. Way to go Bobby!! This crap was the basis of the Bayer-Stoddart report on medical human resources in Canada.

Unfortunately, provincial Ministers of Health (okay, the unelected Deputy Ministers and the bean counters) actually bought into this. The Canadian Medical Association vigorously attempted to show the long term downside, but the bean counters had a really great short term cost saving measure. The number of positions in medical schools was not allowed to keep up with population increases, specialist training programs were cut back, thus fewer (expense causing) specialists were trained and the bean counters waited for the (mostly) middle aged docs to start retiring. In the early nineties, provincial governments were wondering why there was a shortage of doctors.

As the Canadian population aged, required more care, peoples expectations constantly rose, medical technology progressed along with ever more expensive bits of equipment, the costs per capita very predictably didn't come down. What did happen was the creation of things like eighteen month wait lists for joint replacement surgery. In the larger centers where orthopaedic surgeons were not scarce, wait lists were manufactured by the bean counters using a very simple tactic. If the population could be predicted to need two thousand hip joint replacement surgeries in a year, the provincial health care budget was limited to one thousand artificial hip joints. If those tactics didn't seem to be working, the bean counters simply cut funding for surgery in general, thus forcing hospitals to close surgical beds. And as much as I don't want to say this, I'm not making this up.

It took a while before the Federal and Provincial Ministries of Health realized that just maybe, this Evans guy wasn't the greatest thing since sliced bread. Yes, a lot of money was saved short term, at the expense of a medically ill-serviced and increasingly angry population. Elected politicians, which include Ministers of Health, finally caught on to the idea that health care was about the wellness of the people, not a pork belly commodity to be entrusted to economists. There has been a genuine move to train more docs, concerted efforts to reduce wait lists and the results are good. It's just so sad to realize that one economist got the ear of the bean counters and fucked up the health care of an entire population. For reasons beyond me, this Evans guy is still a prof at UBC and is well respected amongst his peers. At least amongst those health care economists who aren't crippled by wonky knees.

 

[amicus]

Stephen55, Doctor, thank you for the time and thought invested to convey the information in your Post; it is appreciated.

You remind me of events in Japan, which has what is called one of the best National Health Care plans in the world. They decided upon a 'wellness' program that encouraged young people to make regular appointments so that any developing medical problem or lifestyle anomalies might be corrected before they became true medical problems.

Of course the existing medical facilities were overwhelmed and could not deal with the increased patient numbers.

However, I totally disagree with your position concerning the commodity status of medicine.

It is impossible for me to influence the mindset of those who believe that government has an obligation to supply medical care. You, and many others, express that as a faith, a belief, an understanding of the role of government to supply the needs of the people.

Worse than that, I am an intellectual purist, one who advocates one absolute position regardless of the opposition or impracticability of my position.

Secondly, I am an American and greatly impressed by the letter and spirit of our Founding Documents that outlined a limited government and enumerated rights of the citizens.

There are no provisions in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights to authorize our government to provide healthcare for the citizens.

Our government, like yours, has police powers, the use of force, to tax the citizens to provide a military to defend the Nation and a Police force and Courts to administer Justice. Beyond those limited functions of government there has always been conflict and disagreement about the role of government in the lives of the people.

Command societies of all shapes and forms have tried to use the power of government to satisfy the needs of the people and have always failed, with some experiments costing the lives of millions of people.

That being documented fact, I choose to advocate and support those who acknowledge that human life and liberty, freedom from oppression, as fundamental in any political or moral conclusion I reach.

As in your country, the American Medical Association, in fact all formal associations of medical personnel, have acted and continue to act, to limit the number of physicians and facilities to maintain a level of scarcity for the commodity of medical care and treatment.

It is like the old European Guild system or the contemporary Labor Union associations that exist to create a scarcity of goods and services to maintain high wages and benefits for Union members.

I assure you that if you remove all the controls, restrictions, regulations and manipulations of the medical field and let the market function freely, that, like McDonald's or Babtist Churches, you would find an ample supply of Doctors and Nurses and clinics on every corner that would support one.

In America, there is no Constitutional 'Right' to medical care.

In a strict definition of the term, no, 'right' can exist that requires a sacrifice by another. That is why the basic rights set forth in the United States, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit, do not require the sacrifice of others time, energy or wealth, only the protected freedoms of the population at large.

Even TE999, a compatriot, believes that government supplied medical care is an honorable pursuit; I do not. I maintain that it requires every person who has been trained in a medical field to become a government employee, quite like a soldier or sailor who must obey. That, my friend, is slavery.

Perhaps you might succeed where all others have failed to rationally express why a free market does not work and why the sacrifice of your human liberty is an acceptable sacrifice to serve the needs of the people, or the 'greater good', if you perceive it in that manner.

Amicus

 

[AquaStarryNight]

I'm an American grad student currently working on my M.A. in Newfoundland. As soon as I heard Danny had decided to go to an American hospital procedure (let's face it, in Newfoundland an accident in downtown St. John's is typically the top news story, so everyone on NTV has been talking about it for three days straight), I groaned, because I knew that the conservative nutjobs would use it as "evidence" of the superiority of the American system to that of the Canadian system.

I'm not going to bother going through the point-by-point argument about why the American system is inherently corrupt and ultimately immoral, since it's been covered so satisfactorily by Dr. Mabeuse.

I add my voice to the conversation only to say that the healthcare that I've received as an international student here in NL is the best I've experienced over the course of my twenty-four years. I grew up in a lower-middle class blue-collar part of Pennsylvania, and my parents worked extremely hard for the twenty-five thousand they brought home every year but with five kids, it's nearly impossible to afford anything but the bare minimum in insurance coverage. Recently, after having managed to insure all of us for most of our lives, my dad was forced to drop his coverage after premiums went up yet again.

It's such a tremendous sense of relief not to have to worry about how I'm going to pay for a potential injury or illness.

Danny Williams went to the States for a medical procedure because he didn't want to have to wait in line, and he could afford to pay for it. It doesn't mean that the system here is less than satisfactory, and it doesn't mean that the U.S. system is working. It just means that he is an extremely well-off businessman/lawyer who didn't want to have to go to Montreal, which is the closest area in which the procedure he needed was available, because having to go to Quebec for a medical procedure when you're fighting that province's government for millions of dollars was less than appealing.

 

[Aggressive One]

I'm an American grad student currently working on my M.A. in Newfoundland. As soon as I heard Danny had decided to go to an American hospital procedure (let's face it, in Newfoundland an accident in downtown St. John's is typically the top news story, so everyone on NTV has been talking about it for three days straight), I groaned, because I knew that the conservative nutjobs would use it as "evidence" of the superiority of the American system to that of the Canadian system.

I'm not going to bother going through the point-by-point argument about why the American system is inherently corrupt and ultimately immoral, since it's been covered so satisfactorily by Dr. Mabeuse.

I add my voice to the conversation only to say that the healthcare that I've received as an international student here in NL is the best I've experienced over the course of my twenty-four years. I grew up in a lower-middle class blue-collar part of Pennsylvania, and my parents worked extremely hard for the twenty-five thousand they brought home every year but with five kids, it's nearly impossible to afford anything but the bare minimum in insurance coverage. Recently, after having managed to insure all of us for most of our lives, my dad was forced to drop his coverage after premiums went up yet again.

It's such a tremendous sense of relief not to have to worry about how I'm going to pay for a potential injury or illness.

Danny Williams went to the States for a medical procedure because he didn't want to have to wait in line, and he could afford to pay for it. It doesn't mean that the system here is less than satisfactory, and it doesn't mean that the U.S. system is working. It just means that he is an extremely well-off businessman/lawyer who didn't want to have to go to Montreal, which is the closest area in which the procedure he needed was available, because having to go to Quebec for a medical procedure when you're fighting that province's government for millions of dollars was less than appealing.

I agree with everything you said here. This is not about better medical care but rather he wanted to expedite his procedure.

I do foresee people will use your last paragraph to latch onto the notion of medical rationing. Unfounded or not, they will use your use of the phrase "he didn't want to have to wait in line."

 

[TE999]

Even TE999, a compatriot, believes that government supplied medical care is an honorable pursuit; I do not.

Ummm...I guess I shoulda put a *sarc* tag on that statement, Ami ol' buddy.

I'm a lot more in favor of my government protecting me from enemies foreign and domestic than making sure I have an 'Uncle Sam' brand adhesive bandage for my boo-boo.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Providing so-called 'Universal Health Care' to all US citizens is a lofty and noble goal...it will not however raise anyone's levels of intelligence, ability, self-discipline, ambition, aversion to risk taking, resistance to abusing alcohol and drugs, carnality, venality and avoidance of anti-social and/or criminal behavior.

Short version: There's plenty of people who won't avail themselves of health care and/or preventive medicine even if it's offered on every street corner unless they have a sucking chest wound or are bleeding from two or more orfices.

'Universal Health Care' availability will not guarantee a mutually healthier population.

So, a reason to deny universal access is because some people won't use it?

 

[amicus]

Ummm...I guess I shoulda put a *sarc* tag on that statement, Ami ol' buddy.

I'm a lot more in favor of my government protecting me from enemies foreign and domestic than making sure I have an 'Uncle Sam' brand adhesive bandage for my boo-boo.

~~~

Thanks, Tom, I was reluctant to critique one of the few who share my respect and admiration for individual human freedom on this forum.

I perhaps should have intuited the sarcasm, I can read now how you intended it.

ami

 

[amicus]

AquaStarryNight
Really Experienced

I'm not going to bother going through the point-by-point argument about why the American system is inherently corrupt and ultimately immoral

Aggressive One
Literotica Guru

~~~

Two new voices, at least to me, on the forum and to both I extend a welcome to the discourse.

I find the use of force to be 'inherently corrupt and ultimately immoral', and your National Healthcare Plan in Canada uses force to confiscate the funds to pay for your system.

Regardless of the number of poignant anecdotes supplied concerning the state of healthcare in America, I remind you that the cornerstone of a free society is that the individual is responsible for his own life and the consequences thereof.

It is through that freedom and the corresponding responsibility that individuals gain a sense of self esteem and self value.

When you turn to the collective to assume the responsibility for your own individual life concerns, you sacrifice that innate and unalienable right to human freedom and you sacrifice it for a handful of aspirins and a bandaid, s TE999 mentioned.

It would appear to me that you trade your freedom and your individual integrity and honor for a very small comfort.

Either of you, as no one else can do, justify the use of force to control the lives of all the Doctors and Nurses in Canada by forcing them to work for the government plan?

Is their individual freedom not important to you?

I don't expect an answer, but the question need be asked.

Amicus