Canadian Healthcare System "Imploding"

If we are discussing what the presidents of the CMA think (outgoing, incoming and elected - Oulette, Doig, Turnbull) why is it nobody seems to remember that Turnbull wants nothing to do with private healthcare. With such a drastic change of opinion one might think the group had changed their minds, but no, it's how the presidents are chosen.

They get one years terms and they are chosen on provincial rotation. Oulette was chosen by the Quebec doctors, Doig was chosen by Saskatchewan doctors and Turnbull is from Ontario. Quebec is Quebec, Saskatchewan is conservative and Ontario is predominantly liberal. Not one of these people represents the opinions of every CMA member on the public health system. There is no Canadawide vote for president.

The CMA is the most powerful lobby group in Canada. Canadians view the private care proponents within the CMA's push for private medicine with claims the system is imploding the same way many Americans view Big Pharma's support of Obama's plan - self-serving and not in the best interest of the citizens.



[edit on 20-8-2009 by Duzey]

Originally posted by Duzey

The CMA is the most powerful lobby group in Canada. Canadians view the private care proponents within the CMA's push for private medicine with claims the system is imploding the same way many Americans view Big Pharma's support of Obama's plan - self-serving and not in the best interest of the citizens.

Yeah Duzey. You tell 'em girl.

"US healthcare is run by large corporations - it's the most expensive in the world, but ranks 37th in quality, and 40 million Americans can't afford any care at all. It's an awful system for people, but corporations make enormous profits, so they're fighting to keep it."

Some Canadian doctors want to go there, and some other Canadian people want to go there - but the majority don't.

...I live in Canada now, but I have lived in the US. If I still lived in the US with the health issues I've got, I'd be dead.

Makes me appreciate the Canadian system. Big time. It's not perfect, or even close, but I know our system saved my life, and I honestly think the world is a better place with me in it.

So thank you my fellow Canadians, Canada, all our wonderful programs and agencies, CSIS and everyone. Sorry for all my ranting about pandemic herpes, fibromuscular dysplasia, H1N1, the perfect microbial storm and everything else that mucks up your communications strategies. Just trying to contribute, in my own way.

Respectfully,
sofi

reply to post by intrepid


1 article = 1 'protestation'. I hear no outcry. I see the CMA president. I see the incoming CMA president.

You lose.

jw

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by intrepid

 

1 article = 1 'protestation'. I hear no outcry. I see the CMA president. I see the incoming CMA president.You lose.jw

On the other hand...it is the empty can that makes the most noise.

This tune is boring...please find another.

www.youtube.com...

ABC's John Stossel Destroys/Pulverizes/Crushes Obama's anti-American 'Health Care' Plan

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by soficrow

"US healthcare ranks 37th in quality, and 40 million Americans can't afford any care at all. "

I am no advocate of the US health system. It should be a free-market system, rather than 'gambling,' which is what all insurance is.

Sadly, some people cling to flawed "studies" and "reports" with no basis in fact.

The numbers you quote are dated and have been refuted by people who care to look behind the sensationalism into the facts.

37th? According to WHO in 2000(and many ATS members)?

40 million "can't afford?" How about the tens of millions who CHOOSE not to buy insurance or are covered under other programs?

Come up with something other than grandstanding and gladhanding.

Deny ignorance.

jw

Originally posted by jdub297

Originally posted by soficrow

"US healthcare ranks 37th in quality, and 40 million Americans can't afford any care at all. "

I am no advocate of the US health system. It should be a free-market system, rather than 'gambling,' which is what all insurance is.

Sadly, some people cling to flawed "studies" and "reports" with no basis in fact.

The numbers you quote are dated and have been refuted by people who care to look behind the sensationalism into the facts.

About 1 in 6 without health insurance

That's a Gallup poll from last month.

37th? According to WHO in 2000(and many ATS members)?

Yes:

www.photius.com...

Are you saying the your system has gotten better in the last 9 years? Hmm?

40 million "can't afford?" How about the tens of millions who CHOOSE not to buy insurance or are covered under other programs?

Back up your assetions with fast. Ie: links.

Come up with something other than grandstanding and gladhanding.

Deny ignorance.

jw

Good advice, you should take it.

reply to post by intrepid


Message removed by poster.



[edit on 8/23/2009 by centurion1211]

If memory serves ...

Please keep the responses Focused on the Actual topic of discussion.

» Breaking Political News

» Canadian Healthcare System "Imploding"

Going forward, any further off-topic replies and/or irrelevant responses will be subject to removal and the member Warned.


Thank you

» Breaking Political News » Canadian Healthcare System "Imploding"

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by jdub297

40 million "can't afford?" How about the tens of millions who CHOOSE not to buy insurance or are covered under other programs?

Back up your assetions with fast. Ie: links.

Fast?
How 'bout fact? (see links)

The WHO "world report" was abandoned after 2000. Its ability to evaluate its five 'comparison' criteria was deemed 'too complicated' (read: subject to inaccuracy, bias and mistake) to continue the rankings.
Your link, my source:
www.photius.com...

Here's one doctor's opinion of what makes the rankings 'a little off':

The WHO ranking has very little to do with the quality of health care. Of several variables, only life expectancy is used as a measure of health care quality. But this is a bad measure of overall health care quality and does not correlate exactly with health care spending. This is due to the fact that there are multiple other variables other than health care that directly impact life expectancy.

The WHO report acknowledges that other variables like obesity, HIV rates, higher tobacco use, higher risk factors for coronary artery disease (including obesity), and homicides in the US compared to other industrialized countries combine to decrease the life expectancy for Americans.

The generally poor life style choices of Americans are more likely to have a causative effect on health care spending than the other way around. I.e. more health care spending is needed to take care of the conditions like heart disease that result from our poor health habits. This is more logical than to assume that high health care spending has anything to do with rates of obesity or smoking.

Of the other criteria, the one that correlates the closest with health care spending is responsiveness. This is because this measure is very closely tied to the availability of health care resources and countries that spend a lot on health care have plenty of resources. The US ranks #1 in responsiveness. The US ranks only #54-55 in something the WHO calls the “fairness of financial contribution” which is the liberal way of saying “it’s only fair that your health care is paid for by someone else”.

Even though the US is #1 in health care responsiveness (i.e., shorter wait times, greater access, more innovation, etc) this one measure is overshadowed by the fact that the WHO believes that equal health care distribution and financing has just as much if not more weight in its rankings.

www.rangelmd.com...

And of the 45, 46 or 50 million "uninsured" figure thrown about ?

Here's what liberal news source NPR reports:

The number of uninsured comes from 2007 Census Bureau estimates.

Some 40 percent of the uninsured are between the ages of 19 and 29. Many of these young people don't buy insurance because they are healthy and don't want to. Young adults, ages 19 to 29, have the highest uninsured rate (30 percent) of any age group. (Most are healthy and do not believe they need insurance - students are frequently covered while enrolled in school and do not generally buy insurance plans of their own.)

A few million of the "uninsured" are likely enrolled in Medicaid but tell the Census that they are uninsured because they don't have private insurance — the so-called Medicaid undercount.

Also, almost one in five of the uninsured are not citizens of the United States.

Another challenge is getting people who are already eligible for existing federal health plans like Medicaid and the state Children's Health Insurance Program to sign up. Of the estimated 46 million uninsured people living in the United States, about one-quarter of them are eligible for these programs but not enrolled.

"46 million uninsured:" A Look Behind the Number

www.npr.org...

Throw in the millions of working families, or retired workers who do not want to pay insurance premiums, but would rather "pay as you go," relying on longstanding relationships with providers or neighborhood medical clinincs for primary care, and the "46 million" evaporates.

On Topic:

As for Canada, the WHO report only places you at 30th. Not so hot with government footing the bill. Maybe it relates to the FACT that the Canadian "distribution" (a WHO 'criterion') is limited due to extended wait times and shortage of doctors and nurses.

Source? OECD and WHO, of course!

deny ignorance

jw