Let's get government health care like Canada

[roster]

National health care

To the editor:

In response to Ricky Kendall's Sunday letter to the editor advocating a Canadian-style health care system for the United States:

Universal health care decides who is best to receive what they need at any given time. If you do not have personal knowledge of Canada's system, listen to those who do.

I have a cousin in Toronto who was found to have a severe case of sleep apnea. When she returned to the specialist for the results, ready to undergo surgical treatment, one question from her doctor changed everything: "Does your sleep apnea keep your husband awake at night?" No.

"Then you are not entitled to have this surgery through your health insurance and will have to pay for it yourself."

Forget the fact that sleep apnea has many dangerous side effects that can kill you. That is not the consideration.

This same cousin has some shoulder problems that are painful and need surgical attention. After being massaged and medicated, she asked her doctor if an MRI would identify the problem. His response? We can order that, but it will take at least one year to get an appointment.

It is also well-known that, regardless of your situation, if you are considered too old to save, you can be denied treatment.

Mr. Kendall, ask yourself why many Canadians come to the United States and willingly pay for their treatment here rather than have some government bureaucrat decide whether they are "eligible."

Our system is not perfect and could use some tweaking, but national health insurance or anything run by the government is not the answer. Learn what goes on elsewhere before you totally buy into national health care and condemn our system.

Mercedes H. Barris

HENDERSON

Source: http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/42251747.html


Rooster


Give me back that filet of fish,
Give me that fish.
If it were you up here on the wall ...

[Linus]

Other than Roads and NASA I have been hard pressed to find out what the government has been able to do better than Private industry. Canada has a smaller population and it is hard for them to manage Health care. Imagine what it would be like in the USA. The problem with Canada and other European countries is that they do not have a younger population to tax to support the aging population. The birth rate is 1.0-1.5 which does not even sustain population. Who will pay for this?

[Debjax]

The company I work for has customers in Canada, and we "chat" occasionally about things other than software. Last year, I was chatting with one of our customers in Canada and she was pretty upset....her mother had just been diagnosed with cancer and was told she had to go on a waiting list for chemo. They had just been told the day before that the wait at least 6 months. They were in the process of trying to get together the money to have her treated in the US...Another personal friend had to wait 18 months to have her gall bladder removed, because it was considered "elective surgery", even though she was in the ER every 6 weeks or so with acute attacks...

Yep, I want a government plan....like I want another broken bone.

[Froro]

I read that and barely got through the first paragraph.

For the record. I was referred to sleep study. Had two studies, met with sleep doctor, and had equipment in less than a month period. (better than I can say for some of the posters I've seen coming out of NY, and NJ.

Needed MRI's, bone scans, cat scans and a myriad of other tests done a few years back. My longest wait was 4 days (and I'm in Toronto....location of the article). My father lives in the sticks in Northern Ontario and had heart surgery immediately...my grandmother as well at 85 years young....that letter is scare mongering.

Yes, just like any other system ours too needs tweeking and is not without it's problems, but it's working just fine and costs less per capita of government money than the US private system. Those situations that you read about are rare.

[Mtnviewer]

While the author's cousin had a couple of questionable experiences with our Canadian Health Care system, I'd suggest that the author NOT make this a summary of how our health care system is either good or bad. I've certainly read, and heard of even worse situations in the USA, so from those, my impression of the USA private or capitalist free enterprise system, even more frightening and very much worthy of abolishment.

In my 50+ years with the Canadian health care system, and with moving quite a lot, I've absolutely nothing bad to say about it. I've elderly frail parents in their late 80's and early 90's who have NEVER been denied health care based on her age or fragile health, nor has such a thing even been suggested by our "system". I wonder where the rumour came from that spewed out that seniors in our country are denied health care based on their age and condition? Compare this experience with the USA private system, as seen in Michael Moore's documentary where one is given the option of what finger to save, as only one can be saved based on their level of insurance, or that life saving or other drugs for health caused by and are denied to 911 heroes? THAT IS SHAMEFUL for a US System that started a war based on 911 terrorism. With the elderly, perhaps health care does reach a point of decision making when health care of some type is discussed, but I've never heard of it being flatly denied. I'd bet that is just USA free enterprise fear mongering, with more the fear of losing their greedy overly profitable "system", at the expense of ignorance of another country's health care system. The USA is all about dishing out fear and their myth of democracy anyway, eg: "You're either with Us, or Against Us" courtesy of the "democratic" GW Bush regime, when open dialogue and a search for solutions other than the regime's were not able to be discussed.

Probably more than anything, it seems that the USA a) generally lives in fear (it's hard to stay "#1) and b) lives in fear of "change", even if that change might be for the better. This latter generalization might especially be true of the wealthy in USA society, who seem to live in incredible fear of losing one red cent of their wealth.

Democracies aren't easy. A healthy society is crucial to a country, whereas free enterprise USA doesn't want a "society" vs. every man for themselves. Yet society is crucial to a world, and "some" socialism, aka, government management of societal needs, is not a thing to be feared. Canada, Sweden, Norway, Germany, and many other countries with social elements are doing just fine, such with their health care systems, their banking, their crime rate, etc., and MUCH better than the fear mongering, free enterprise, capitalist system of the USA that got the world in all this financial trouble in the first place, through the free enterprise of greed, lies and the spreading of fear.

As one American once said, "You have nothing to fear, but Fear itself." So lighten up, have patience, live a little and try something different! It's not like the US health care system itself is actually working that well for anyone other than those making huge profits. Those are likely the folks that are bashing every other country's health care system along with those folks that just haven't lived within our health care system and so are talking about things that they know nothing of.

[roster]

....... their myth of democracy anyway ........

Yep, Mtn.

We need to get rid of that myth which began to be propagated in the 1950s.

We are not a democracy.

Democracies are evil forms of government because they don't protect the rights of us minorities.

We are a constitutional republic and need to cling to that.

Our recent and current Presidents don't remember that of the two things they swore to when taking the oath of office, one of them is, "and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

[Julie]

I definitely have to protest those "reports" about Canadian healthcare! Of course you can find the odd and wrong 'event' that has happened, and that can happen anywhere at all, but I really would want to know the facts about the stories related here, rather than some third hand account because they just sound bizarre or way out of date. The only time "service" might be withheld from anyone, aged or not, would be if the family (or patient) had made a specific request for things to be done that way - our system has plenty of MD's who specialize in elderly care and who are well aware that outside of something like Alzheimer's, age alone is not another way of saying it's too late to bother. Certainly if someone is 90, and a new lesion of some kind is diagnosed, one that would require really heroic and/or long and difficult treatment without necessarily offering a lot more quality of life benefits in future, or the only treatment available is one that patient could not possibly survive in a meaningful way, then of course common sense will come into making decisions on how to proceed, but I guarantee the same scenario goes on daily all over the U.S. And while it might take longer in some instances to get MRI's than it does down south, where they seem to be done routinely for anyone who stubs a toe, certainly if one is REALLY needed for a suspected serious diagnosis, and/or if the patient is already in hospital (a different scheduling set-up than you'd find for people walking in off the street) it will be done right away. But if a patient seems like a not-bad candidate for an MRI to clarify details of an already diagnosed and non-life threatening condition, then yes, they may have to wait some time to get it, and I've never heard of it being to the real medical detriment of any patient beyond their impatience or living with a little (treatable) discomfort for a while. And that gallbladder story is just plain nonsense. The difference between the U.S. and us being, I think, that while we may wait a bit longer for certain procedures, we do manage to treat any and everyone who requires it within such time as it's medically necessary, but in your country, while those who are 'covered' get treated at the drop of a hat, whole sections of your population can remain untreated at all forever if they cannot afford it. Our MD's are good at triaging patients, but yours seem to see no need for it (except maybe in the ER), because there are fewer patients to worry about - half of them don't dare darken your doors for fear of the medicine being a worse fate than the disease.

[DreamStalker]

Other than Roads and NASA I have been hard pressed to find out what the government has been able to do better than Private industry.

Actually, government does earth sciences (geology, hydrology, climatology) better than private industry ... could probably say the same thing about military defense, fire fighting, and police work. Never been to any private park systems ... at least not near where I live. I don't fly much but I wonder what it would be like if private industry profits were the motivating drive behind airline safety I was only barely able to afford a public university education ... if only private was available, I'd be more of a dumb ass than I am now ... and let's not forget that private banking system, they have screwed it up real bad at least twice in the lat 100 years.

Canada has a smaller population and it is hard for them to manage Health care. Imagine what it would be like in the USA. The problem with Canada and other European countries is that they do not have a younger population to tax to support the aging population. The birth rate is 1.0-1.5 which does not even sustain population. Who will pay for this?

Yes ... but we have Mexico and their Mexicans right next door.

[MurphysLaw]

More fear mongering, for sure. That's what it is.

Thank you, Canadians, for your positive input on your health care system. Unfortunately some people will never believe what you say.

Our system here is so screwed up that something has to change soon.

[Slinky]

Eh, I've seen plenty of complaints in this forum and other BY CANADIANS about Canadian health care, just our Canadian members have seen complaints in this forum from AMERICANS about AMERICAN health care. The same goes for those in the UK and their health system. France supposedly had one of the best national health care systems - and is currently on the verge of going broke as well.

The thing is ... seems like every time the US government does me a favor I end up getting screwed. You're darn right having the US government tinker w/health care scares the hell outta me!!!

[Goofproof]

The government did a good job on global warming, I even had to heat my house this winter in Indiana. Jim

[kebsa]

one thing that i have learnt from using baord like this ( also use an MS board and have used others in the past) is that the concept of universal health care is a very touchy subject- i always assumed that when dealing with people with health needs that are quite costly that support for access to universal care would be almost automatic but i am wrong.

i do not live in canada but i do live in a country that has what is considered to be universal health care. we have a system that is called medicare but it is very diffirent to medicare in the US. here it provides access to health care within the public helath system (the larger hospitals, university linked hospitals etc) and medical practioners. everybody with a taxable income above a certain level- for me as a single person with no dependants i pay the levy if my income is above $23000 and from memory the levy is 1.5% of taxable income. if we also take out private inurance we get a 30%contribution from the government- but for those on incomes above a certain limit they pay an addition medicare levy surcharge (another 1.5% i think). Yes access to some kinds of treatments through our public system can be slow, they tend to be the sorts of things that are costly but also not immediately life threatening eg if you need a hip replacement you will wait for quite a while for that- perhaps 6 to 12 months for the inital appointment then the surgery wil be scheduled based on how severe you problem is and how busy the hospital you went to is (eg the demand on their services) at one stage the waiting list were very long but the hsopitals now get penalised if they have unacceptably long waiting list but for something that is not life threatening you may wait 6 to 12 months. if someting is life threatening eg you come to an ED dept with an acute heart attack and it is decided that you are an agioplast candidate- you get it there and then! if you need chemo you get it when you need it (there have been some reports of problems but only when the treatment is not an accepted treatment, its still experimental). with the medicare system, for hospital treatment you do not get to chose you Doctor and you are part of the learning experience of interns and registrars. i have always had inurance as choice of treatning surgeon/physician has always been important to me- mainly so that i see the same doctor each time and care is more predicatable but i know that if i had no inurance i would get good care.

i think our system of private insurance and government support is a good mix- they work well together. there are some situations where there are longer waits and sleep sutdies is one of them but that is mainly because there just are not that many sleep clinics- and i am sure that we would not have much say about what machine we had so this is one that i went private for- the sleep studies were fully funded but very limited finacial support for the equipment. i was in hospital 22 times last year for periods of 1 week to 4 weeks and it did not cost me a cent! outside hospital if the doctor bulk bills it does not cost anything but if they don't bulk bill there will be a gap payment some of which can be claimed - and anything that is health related but not covered by medicare or private or a combination of both, can be claimed through tax. it is not all perfect though, as a preson with disabilities under the age of 65 but over 18 i need to access community support services and unitl recently i needed minimal help but MS is degenerative and my needs have changed so i have had to apply for more help only to be told there is no more funding and i am on the unmet needs list- i can get short term crisis help if i am risk of being hospitalised and that would last for 10 days, but getting long term help is proving to be a challenge- they have poured a lot of resources into keeping people over the age of 65 in their own homes but have forgotten those of us who develop a disability as an adult, that is not a compensatible accident (eg MVA) and we are over the age of 18. basically the help is assigned according to dx not ability and there are significant shortfalls- that is probably the biggest hole in our system- organisation such as the MS society provide a lot help in the form of advocacy and also they can access intermediate funding to help while we come up to the top of a waiting list- i am in the process of applying

i do not think our system is perfect but it is not bad! we do not have to struggle to pay for medictions- i pay $5.30 and that is capped so i only have to pay for the 1st 52 prescriptions in the year and then my meds are free. it astounds me at some of the costs i hear you guys facing both for meds and sometimes treatments. I too watched sicko and i am the 1st to realise that he was paiting the worst picture just as he painted socialised medicine as some kind of utopia- i do think that you iinurance companies have too much power- here premiums are community based, not based on our history they can only be raised if we do not maintain cover over the age of 35 then they can raise the cost by 2%per yer but if my doctor says i need a sleep study or a knee replacement or gastric banding i get it! some policies will give a lower premium by excluding some procedures up front (they temd to be high cost procedures) but that is a known choice- as long as i have full coverage i get what ever treatment my doctor says i need- i think the power your insurers have is way to high- it is treated the same as household or car insurance and policy holders are treating accordingly. i do not think it is appropriatte for a bean counter so determine an alternative treatment over what your treating dr has suggested is needed. one of the disturbing examples i have come across recently is a women who was morbidly obese and needed bariatric surgery- she also had health problems such as a clotting problem and an auto immune problem so the treating surgeon suggested tha laprascopic banding sugery was the option, the risk of blood clots in the lungs etc was too high with the more extensive gastric bypass but even though the surgeon said her risk was high having gastric bypass was high the insurer would only pay for that option! thankfully she came though ok but that was a horrible situation to put her and her surgeon in! it has been suggested that the insurers tend to decline gastric banding because the surgery is more attractive to patients and they fear being flooded with claims! but i have a real problem that has patient make a choice between no treatment (that is risky) or higher risk surgery- it is interesting to note that in the rest of the world gastric bypass is not done very often anymore as gastric banding has proven to be as effective and safer- sorry for the tangent but it is one detailed example i have come across.

what ever health system is used, chronic health problems tend to be the ones that are treated the worst- we are beginning to see the early changes to a proactive system where it has been accepted that a lot of problems can be prevented or minimised if treated more aggressively early on but proactive health care in place of sickness management (that both our systems currently use) will take a long time to become common place but that is what we should be pushing for- it may look more expensive at a first glance but it has been shown that it can save a lot in long term care

[spitintheocean]

Before you read on, I'll just say this. The majority of Canadians live within two hours of the US border. We have the benefits of both worlds, if we don't like something about our "free" medicare, we can hop across the border and pay for the expected service. Unfortunately our southern cousins don't have the option of driving up here for our "free" service:

Now on to some scary US health care stats:

In 2008, employer health insurance premiums increased by 5.0 percent – two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $12,700, while annual premiums for single coverage averaged over $4,700.

Workers contributed nearly $3,400, or 12 percent more than they did in 2007 and are now paying $1,600 more in premiums annually for family coverage than they did in 1999.

Since 1999, employment-based health insurance premiums have increased 120 percent, compared to cumulative inflation of 44 percent and cumulative wage growth of 29 percent during the same period.

Experts agree that our health care system is riddled with inefficiencies, excessive administrative expenses, inflated prices, poor management, and inappropriate care, waste and fraud. These problems significantly increase the cost of medical care and health insurance for employers and workers and affect the security of families.

National Health Care Spending

In 2008, health care spending in the United States reached $2.4 trillion, and was projected to reach $3.1 trillion in 2012. Health care spending is projected to reach $4.3 trillion by 2016.

Health care spending is 4.3 times the amount spent on national defense.

In 2008, the United States will spend 17 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on health care. It is projected that the percentage will reach 20 percent by 2017.

Although nearly 46 million Americans are uninsured, the United States spends more on health care than other industrialized nations, and those countries provide health insurance to all their citizens.

Health care spending accounted for 10.9 percent of the GDP in Switzerland, 10.7 percent in Germany, 9.7 percent in Canada and 9.5 percent in France, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

According to a recent report, the United States has $480 billion in excess spending each year in comparison to Western European nations that have universal health insurance coverage. The costs are mainly associated with excess administrative costs and poorer quality of care.

The United States spends six times more per capita on the administration of the health care system than its peer Western European nations.

One other thing. Nearly 85% of Americans carry private health insurance and the company that insured all those private health insurers was AIG which has recently been 'Obamamized' . I think you guys may now have state insured health care but just don't realize it yet.

Paul

[MrSandman]

Obamanation scares the hell out of me ! Is he the anti-christ ? Stay tuned !

Images of the movie or book 1984 come to mind whenever Obamanation speaks.

[MrSandman]

Just found out my Cobra if I get let go soon is $960 for medical and $25 for dental. This Cobra has always been the biggest damn lie. Who the hell could afford that if they don't have a job.

Unemployment = $1061.00 Before Tax
Cobra for Family = $985.00
-------------------------------------------------
Leftover = $76.00

House payment
Car payment
Utilities
Food
Etc.

Once a good majority of us are unemployed we will be begging for government healthcare compared to no healthcare. I will be begging for it if one of my kids gets sick cause I can't afford Cobra.

This is why gun sales went crazy and there is an ammunition shortage...