[Cooniedog]

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Cooniedawg

[David Nebenzahl]

On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko" for
a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.


--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism

[dpb]

Cooniedog wrote:
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

As Upscale noted, there's a lot of rationing for lack of better
nomenclature I've observed in talking w/ business acquaintances where
I've done onsite support work and gotten to know them quite well.
They're quite close to US border so it is routine for them to simply
forego the Canadian system and drive to Minot, ND or other border towns
for routine care, paying out of pocket rather than wait. That's for the
kids have ear ache, etc. The parents mostly just tough it out has been
my observation.

That doesn't address the problem that although it's been a few years now
since I retired so there may have been some improvement but the last
time I was on site they were in a plant outage so had fair amount of
overtime pay in his packet. That period the total witholding was over
50% of his gross.

The other thing I have observed over the last 20 years or so is that in
rural US, the primary place from which we can recruit physicians to come
to small, under-served areas that are not popular places for US-educated
doctors other than SE Asia and the South American locations is Canada.
In the local health care system in this relative to other places within
100-200 miles but still small by city standards place almost one-quarter
of the doctors are expatriate Canadians. They come despite the seeming
lack of cultural amenities and non-idyllic climate primarily because
they have simply become fed up w/ "The System". When one contemplates
that these folks are packing up and moving permanently from their
birthplace because the burdens of practicing medicine in the US are so
much lighter on them, that's pretty telling in my book to follow the
direction from which these folks have come isn't a really good idea.

--

[J. Clarke]

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have
months and even years of delays before they receive treatments for
some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko"
for a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.

I suggest that if you rent it you do so for a good example of propaganda.

[Swingman]

Upscale wrote:


So, maybe the answer to your question is yes to both questions. But it's too
complicated question to answer outright. There's always going to be
exceptions to every argument and there's always a host of variables to
consider when answering it. Personally, I have a host of medical
difficulties. I'm not going to go into details, but for the problems I've
had and currently have, I feel I have a great deal of experience with the
Ontario healthcare system. Does that make me an expert? I wouldn't think so,
but for the average person walking around, I think my experiences eclipse
most of what the general public has experienced. Anyways, that's the way I
feel whether it's factually true or not.

Thanks for taking the time to attempt an answer to, as you say, a very
difficult question.

Your response is, IMO, erudite, and, since it is based on personal
experience, its value is therefore increased.



--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

[Upscale]

"Cooniedog" wrote in message
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I'll answer your question the best I can, but it's definitely not a
woodworking question. It's also a difficult question to answer. It's true,
that in some cases, there's an extremely large waiting list for treatment.
It's not an outright refusal of healthcare, just a fact that someone may
have to wait years for treatment. Some might argue that it's another way to
refuse help. Many Canadians who can afford it, choose to go to the USA and
pay for treatment they might have to wait years for in Canada. That part is
certainly true.

There are certain cases where some individuals have been denied healthcare
primarily on the basis that there's only so much money to go around and that
it's considered more prudent to direct funds where the greatest number of
individuals can be treated. A simple example of this (and many of these
cases are in the courts) is funding for special education for autistic
children. I believe the Ontario courts ruled that funding ends for those
children six years or older even though it's agreed that they'd still
benefit from this education. I'm not prepared to argue for or against the
morality of any of this.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/...m-ontario.html

Another example and something I consider to be health care is dentistry.
It's not covered by general healthcare anywhere that I'm aware of in Canada,
yet it's agreed that poor dental care can result in a host of diseases ~
diabetes for example. So, yes simple example would confirm that some types
of healthcare are not funded.

So, maybe the answer to your question is yes to both questions. But it's too
complicated question to answer outright. There's always going to be
exceptions to every argument and there's always a host of variables to
consider when answering it. Personally, I have a host of medical
difficulties. I'm not going to go into details, but for the problems I've
had and currently have, I feel I have a great deal of experience with the
Ontario healthcare system. Does that make me an expert? I wouldn't think so,
but for the average person walking around, I think my experiences eclipse
most of what the general public has experienced. Anyways, that's the way I
feel whether it's factually true or not.

Why the question?

[evodawg[_2_]]

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko" for
a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.


That's the dumbest suggestion I've ever heard! He's about as accurate as Tim
Geithner on his Income Taxes.
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

[Mr Fuxit]

On 13 May, 17:31, Cooniedog wrote:
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Cooniedawg

I will admit that the system of medical care in the UK is far from
perfect(especially since
the Thatcher administration's interference), but it seems to be many,
many times better
than the US model for those who cannot afford private health care.

[David Nebenzahl]

On 5/13/2009 12:34 PM evodawg spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko" for
a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.

That's the dumbest suggestion I've ever heard! He's about as accurate as Tim
Geithner on his Income Taxes.

So please treat us to a short analysis of where, exactly, Moore is wrong
about the badness of the U.S. health-care system as compared to other
countries. I look forward to this.


--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism

[evodawg[_2_]]

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 12:34 PM evodawg spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko" for
a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.

That's the dumbest suggestion I've ever heard! He's about as accurate as
Tim Geithner on his Income Taxes.

So please treat us to a short analysis of where, exactly, Moore is wrong
about the badness of the U.S. health-care system as compared to other
countries. I look forward to this.


Won't even waste my time. Just keep watching another one of the made for
profit docudrama and claim its FACT! Moore is a buffoon!
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

[David Nebenzahl]

On 5/13/2009 12:49 PM evodawg spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 12:34 PM evodawg spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko" for
a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.

That's the dumbest suggestion I've ever heard! He's about as accurate as
Tim Geithner on his Income Taxes.

So please treat us to a short analysis of where, exactly, Moore is wrong
about the badness of the U.S. health-care system as compared to other
countries. I look forward to this.

Won't even waste my time. Just keep watching another one of the made for
profit docudrama and claim its FACT! Moore is a buffoon!

I see you've chosen the Hannity/Limbaugh, et al, method of assertion by
bellowing--"it's true because I SAY IT IS and you're just a liberal idiot".

Thanks for playing.


--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism

[evodawg[_2_]]

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 12:49 PM evodawg spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 12:34 PM evodawg spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have
months and even years of delays before they receive treatments for
some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko"
for a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.

That's the dumbest suggestion I've ever heard! He's about as accurate
as Tim Geithner on his Income Taxes.

So please treat us to a short analysis of where, exactly, Moore is wrong
about the badness of the U.S. health-care system as compared to other
countries. I look forward to this.

Won't even waste my time. Just keep watching another one of the made for
profit docudrama and claim its FACT! Moore is a buffoon!

I see you've chosen the Hannity/Limbaugh, et al, method of assertion by
bellowing--"it's true because I SAY IT IS and you're just a liberal
idiot".

Thanks for playing.


If you say so then it must be true!
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

[Upscale]

"Swingman" wrote in message
Your response is, IMO, erudite, and, since it is based on personal
experience, its value is therefore increased.

Thanks Karl. Now, how much you want to bet that one of my other
"discussions" is going produce the comment that my illnesses have made me
hate the world and I'm out to get everybody?

BTW, this summer I've been commissioned to produce benches for the trestle
picnic table I built last summer. No money involved, but I'll get invited
over to a good half dozen outdoor parties. They will be pretty close to half
size copies of the table itself. I figure with such a nice looking design,
why play with perfection. I'll post them when they're made.

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 13 May 2009 11:31:47 -0500, Cooniedog
wrote:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Cooniedawg

The best argument for private health care is the ability to change
doctors when proper care isn't given.
Example: my daughter and her husband were visiting in California when
their 2 year old daughter became ill. They took her to the closest
emergency room and were seen in a reasonable time. However, although
penicillin was listed in the "medical allergies" section of the chart,
the attending physician wanted to treat the child with amoxicillin (a
penicillin equvalent) and ignored the parents' warnings that the child
was allergic to peniciillin. One of the nurses suggested that they go
to another hospital - where they did receive proper care.

If you have big brother provided health care and big brother assigned
physicians (any warm body is equivalent to any other warm body), how
do you work around incompetence?

John

[Chris Friesen]

Cooniedog wrote:
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some illnesses.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

One problem that I see is that everyone wants the latest and greatest
treatment, which generally translates to much more expensive. If a
treatment is 5% better, but 10x the price, should we as a population go
for it? It's easy to say no, until the patient is someone you know.

Health care is locally governed, so there are going to be regional
differences. For reference, I'm in my 30s, and live in Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan, Canada, a city of a bit over 200000 people.

Wait times have been an issue in the past and continue to be an issue
for certain types of treatment--generally expensive/complicated things
like MRI, cancer, heart, hip/knee replacement, cataract surgery, etc.
My father-in-law had hip surgery and did need to wait a bit. I've heard
anecdotally that these times are coming down around here though.

Usually it takes a few days to a week if I want to book an appointment
with my family doctor, but for more urgent things I can go to a clinic
or to the Emergency ward at the hospital.

I broke two fingers while traveling, and received both physiotherapy and
occupational therapy to help get mobility and strength back in those
fingers. No delays in getting treatment. Similarly, getting in to see
a chiropractor is easy.

My wife and I just had our first child. No significant delays,
generally good care. We did pay for a doula to help us through the
process, but midwives are covered in some areas and that might be an
option for next time.

Chris

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 13 May 2009 16:27:10 -0500, "Upscale"
wrote:



And family doctors are getting increasingly hard to find in Canada. The USA
keeps thieving our doctors by offering better pay and few working hours.
Guess I can't blame them for that, but I think doctors graduated in Canada
should be required to commit a specified period of service in Canada before
they move lock stock and barrel to sell their Canadian acquired skills
elsewhere.



Some areas of the US will "forgive" college loans in return for a
specified number of years serving in an area with insufficient
doctors.

Maybe that's something you can steal from us? ;-)

John

[FrozenNorth[_4_]]

On Wed, 13 May 2009 16:34:05 -0500, "Upscale"
wrote:


"Chris Friesen" wrote in message
Health care is locally governed, so there are going to be regional
differences. For reference, I'm in my 30s, and live in Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan, Canada, a city of a bit over 200000 people.

What's the physician availability like there Chris? Is there a doctor
shortage. Ok, stupid question, I'm hearing more and more about shortages
everywhere. Let me rephrase. Do people seeking a personal physican have to
wait very long before they find one, as far as you know?

My wife and I just had our first child. No significant delays,
generally good care. We did pay for a doula to help us through the
process, but midwives are covered in some areas and that might be an
option for next time.

I've got a friend who is considering hiring a midwife. Was it expensive and
did you find his/her services worthwhile?


Depending upon the answer, they do have a Lee Valley in Saskatoon, so
you could move there.

Just to put it back on topic.
;-)

--
Froz....

[[email protected]]

On May 13, 2:29 pm, "Upscale" wrote:
But it's too
complicated question to answer outright. There's always going to be
exceptions to every argument and there's always a host of variables to
consider when answering it.

Well said. And I think those two succinct sentences cover all methods
and attempts at subsidized health care.

I am and have been very actively involved in the care of my elderly,
sickly parents. I was astonished that Medicare/Medicaid does not
cover glasses for the elderly. You gotta be kidding me... no glasses
for those old, weak eyes? Nor does it cover hearing aids.

In fact, when my Mom PASSED (as in totally gone) out at her birthday
party at her favorite restaurant, my parents just got bill that
Medicare/Medicaid refused to pay. It wasn't the resultant hospital
bill, it was the transport bill to get a 79 year old woman with type
III diabetes and high blood pressure to the hospital. Even though she
could not stand up and had to be wheeled to transit, M/M determined
that someone could have taken her to the hospital.

It goes on and on. The system is inconsistent, out of touch, and
filled with more levels of bureaucracy than can be imagined.

But, on the other hand, last year my folks paid about $2500 for a
pacemaker and defibrillator to be installed. This included 8 days in
the hospital, the surgeries and all fees, and a month in rehab with
physical therapy. The hospital and the M/M team responded immediately
and Mom was in the hospital and scheduled for surgery the day she went
in for a "dizzy spell".

So good work there. They saved her life. And the resultant bills
were somewhere along the $140,000 range with the rehab and follow up
visits for the next 6 months.

In discussing these matters with a visiting friend from Montreal, he
was able to shine a light on the health care system in his part of the
world.

We in the USA all KNOW that everywhere else in the world that the
health care systems of all other countries (including Cuba!) is all
sunshine and lollipops. Everyone gets whatever they want, whenever
they need it, and all aspects of their health and well being are
covered immediately and paid in full by the state.

According to my Canadian friend, not so.

Here is life in Canada according to his report, not mine, I am simply
sharing what he told me:

- if you have a terrible cough or cold, the wait to see is doctor is
so long that you will be well by the time they give you your appt.
(a little humor there, he is sure they do this on purpose)

- if you have an emergency like broken bones, a terrible bleeding cut,
or something that requires immediate treatment, you are treated well.
He would know, he makes commercial institutional furniture so those
things happen

- if you have something that can "wait" like an unidentified pain
somewhere, it will indeed wait. Sometimes for months

- re-hab and after care are a little thin. He cites his broken leg
that was broken in 2-3 places when he was mountain biking (must be
something in the CA water - he's 54) to his favorite fly fishing
area. After they took the cast off, his rehab was a printout of
exercises, and they told him to stay off of it until he felt more
comfortable. He said it was the same when his wife was hurt in a non
life threatening car wreck

- according to him, there are a lot of questions about the quality of
care as well. Again, physicians are told to be mindful that there is
only so much money in the system (see the aftercare comments) and not
to spend the dough all in one or two places. He said there is a lot
of "take two of these and call the office in the morning"

- wondering about the quality of care ties in to the fact that CA
doctors seem to make about 1/3 or less the dough American doctors
make. If you could make 2/3 more money for doing the same thing, it
would be a powerful incentive to move somewhere else

- in the CA system, psychiatric help is almost non existent. He has
a partner that has physician diagnosed bouts of chronic, severe
depression. Yet, all he gets is pills. He said that to see his
shrink, the guy calls, and it is 6 weeks to 2 months to get to see
"his" doctor

- According to him, changing doctors is almost impossible. If you
don't like the care you are getting, then you should go away. He
cited many examples of this, and I was surprised until he explained.
He told me that at one time you could change doctors, but that so many
people went from one doctor to another (no charge, right?) until they
finally found one to tell them what they wanted to hear that they
system was too clogged

He told me that the CA system shines in two areas. First, it IS
actually open to everyone, regardless of any conditions as long as
they are Canadian. Second, if you have medium grade illness where you
can take the time to schedule treatment, or an absolute screaming
emergency the system works.

He has had two corrective surgeries that were non life threatening,
and while he waited two+ months to get them, it went off well and had
no problems (or a bill!).

He has never had problems when taking an employee to the emergency
room with injuries from work. No 3 hour wait while they verify
insurance, the company information, etc. Just take them in and they
are treated. Try THAT here, construction guys!

Overall, he sees the CA model not being nearly as good as it was, and
no improvement on the horizon. He expects it to get worse before it
gets better due to the fact that small taxes to subsidize the system
are extremely unpopular.

And like here, the conversation is never far away about what to do
with the failing national health care system.

For me it was an enlightening discussion. And we both agreed, that
both systems don't totally suck, but that both could be much better.

But where to start? How to do it?

Decades of appointing committees, making commitments, making health
care a "priority" and all the other drivel from politicians has gone
absolutely nowhere.

Personally, I have a host of medical
difficulties. I'm not going to go into details, but for the problems I've
had and currently have, I feel I have a great deal of experience with the
Ontario healthcare system. Does that make me an expert? I wouldn't think so,
but for the average person walking around, I think my experiences eclipse
most of what the general public has experienced. Anyways, that's the way I
feel whether it's factually true or not.

You have shared just a bit of your challenges here. And I am not
being sarcastic... but just being able to understand the amount of
paperwork and levels of people to be dealt with in your situation make
you an expert in my opinion.

The health care system is a monster unto itself, no matter where you
are. At this point, I know more about M/M than I ever thought there
was to know. In the end, we still have to go to our extended care
provider for counseling on what to do to make sure the folks care is
covered. BUT... they cannot tell us what to do. They can only lay
out options. If the are caught coaching or counseling us, they can
lose the right to do business with M/M.

I have no idea what it would take to fix any of it. Personally, I
don't believe it can be fixed. I think it's too far gone.

Obviously, this is something that has been on my mind...

Robert

[Upscale]

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
I see you've chosen the Hannity/Limbaugh, et al, method of assertion by
bellowing--"it's true because I SAY IT IS and you're just a liberal
idiot".

Thanks for playing.

Is this another argument brewing? Can I play? Mike Marlow says he won't play
with me anymore so I need a new fight.

Just to keep this argument on woodworking, let's all carve toothpicks and
start poking each other. Hey Mike, you can play too if you promise not to
poke me too hard.

[LD]

"dpb" wrote in message ...
Cooniedog wrote:
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great Britain.
They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying that
Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months and
even years of delays before they receive treatments for some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of the
sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective countries
when it comes to health care.

As Upscale noted, there's a lot of rationing for lack of better
nomenclature I've observed in talking w/ business acquaintances where I've
done onsite support work and gotten to know them quite well. They're quite
close to US border so it is routine for them to simply forego the Canadian
system and drive to Minot, ND or other border towns for routine care,
paying out of pocket rather than wait. That's for the kids have ear ache,
etc. The parents mostly just tough it out has been my observation.

That doesn't address the problem that although it's been a few years now
since I retired so there may have been some improvement but the last time
I was on site they were in a plant outage so had fair amount of overtime
pay in his packet. That period the total witholding was over 50% of his
gross.

The other thing I have observed over the last 20 years or so is that in
rural US, the primary place from which we can recruit physicians to come
to small, under-served areas that are not popular places for US-educated
doctors other than SE Asia and the South American locations is Canada. In
the local health care system in this relative to other places within
100-200 miles but still small by city standards place almost one-quarter
of the doctors are expatriate Canadians. They come despite the seeming
lack of cultural amenities and non-idyllic climate primarily because they
have simply become fed up w/ "The System". When one contemplates that
these folks are packing up and moving permanently from their birthplace
because the burdens of practicing medicine in the US are so much lighter
on them, that's pretty telling in my book to follow the direction from
which these folks have come isn't a really good idea.

--


One of the most rational responses I've seen on this issue so, of course,
everyone will ignore it.

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 13 May 2009 14:29:04 -0500, "Upscale"
wrote:


"Cooniedog" wrote in message
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I'll answer your question the best I can, but it's definitely not a
woodworking question. It's also a difficult question to answer. It's true,
that in some cases, there's an extremely large waiting list for treatment.
It's not an outright refusal of healthcare, just a fact that someone may
have to wait years for treatment. Some might argue that it's another way to
refuse help. Many Canadians who can afford it, choose to go to the USA and
pay for treatment they might have to wait years for in Canada. That part is
certainly true.

There are certain cases where some individuals have been denied healthcare
primarily on the basis that there's only so much money to go around and that
it's considered more prudent to direct funds where the greatest number of
individuals can be treated. A simple example of this (and many of these
cases are in the courts) is funding for special education for autistic
children. I believe the Ontario courts ruled that funding ends for those
children six years or older even though it's agreed that they'd still
benefit from this education. I'm not prepared to argue for or against the
morality of any of this.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/...m-ontario.html

Another example and something I consider to be health care is dentistry.
It's not covered by general healthcare anywhere that I'm aware of in Canada,
yet it's agreed that poor dental care can result in a host of diseases ~
diabetes for example. So, yes simple example would confirm that some types
of healthcare are not funded.

So, maybe the answer to your question is yes to both questions. But it's too
complicated question to answer outright. There's always going to be
exceptions to every argument and there's always a host of variables to
consider when answering it. Personally, I have a host of medical
difficulties. I'm not going to go into details, but for the problems I've
had and currently have, I feel I have a great deal of experience with the
Ontario healthcare system. Does that make me an expert? I wouldn't think so,
but for the average person walking around, I think my experiences eclipse
most of what the general public has experienced. Anyways, that's the way I
feel whether it's factually true or not.

From Manitoba that runs health care a shade differently than Ontario,
every sentence is more or less true. I'll add that for life
threatening issues you get bumped forward but not in front of someone
who is dieing faster than you. Unless you seem to be important like
a weasel politician and his family or a sports player: then you go to
front of the line and spare no expense. I have noticed that people
with money go to the US, Mexico, or Europe because for cash up front,
no one has to wait. And there are some procedues that have long
lists because of resource allocations. And there are some things not
covered because of extreme high costs. Getting bitten by a mountain
(north slope) jumping spider from Peru comes to mind ): My doctor
came up with that one.

Dental, eye glasses, hearing aids, and most drugs are not covered
unless your in prison or on welfare where most all of it is covered.
Lets face it - if you get sent to prison for life (8 yrs) we want you
healthy enuff to do the time.

I once asked a dermatologist why it took so long and cost so much. He
said the admin costs ran at about 85% and that doctors got the
remaining 15%. I assume the 85 included hospital costs and that he
wasn't slinging me a line.

If I sound a tad cynical over this it is because the system has
inequities. We hire nurses part time and burn them out working
double shifts. Somehow paying parttime overtime is cheaper that
paying benefits. We don't allow private services to open shop because
that would jeapardize publice health care and all the doctors would
flock over to the dark side. When a small community raises money for
an MRI machine we don't let it get hooked up because it wasn't
budgeted for, it's in the wrong community, and we want things
centralized. The list goes on.

Yes, there is a whole lot more to this and it gets complicated and
it's not nessessarily about how much money, but more like who gets to
touch the money first and dole it out.

Canadians want pay what the market will bear (if you can). Americans
want pay what's fair (if you can get it). Seems we both want what the
other has.

P

[Upscale]

wrote in message
If you have big brother provided health care and big brother assigned
physicians (any warm body is equivalent to any other warm body), how
do you work around incompetence?

Doctors aren't assigned in Canada, unless you're referring to the doctor on
duty in an emergency room. A person is always free to request or seek
another physician. And as to formal complaints of incompetence, I believe
they're all looked into, however the College of Physicians has the
unfortunate reputation of being pretty lenient on many of their members.
But, sometimes they do take actions as confirmed by the resulting case of
Dr. Charles Smith, former chief forensic pathologist for the Province of
Ontario. Many, many lawsuits pending because of this guy's incompetence.

Of course, another doctor might not be available in the middle of the night
in an emergency room. In that case assuming the emergency isn't dire, one
can walk across the street to another hospital, which is something I've done
after four hours of waiting. Triage is a bitch sometimes. Going to another
hospital is easier to do in a place like Toronto, but relatively difficult
when you live up north where another doctor or hospital might be many hours
away.

And family doctors are getting increasingly hard to find in Canada. The USA
keeps thieving our doctors by offering better pay and few working hours.
Guess I can't blame them for that, but I think doctors graduated in Canada
should be required to commit a specified period of service in Canada before
they move lock stock and barrel to sell their Canadian acquired skills
elsewhere.

[Upscale]

"Chris Friesen" wrote in message
Health care is locally governed, so there are going to be regional
differences. For reference, I'm in my 30s, and live in Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan, Canada, a city of a bit over 200000 people.

What's the physician availability like there Chris? Is there a doctor
shortage. Ok, stupid question, I'm hearing more and more about shortages
everywhere. Let me rephrase. Do people seeking a personal physican have to
wait very long before they find one, as far as you know?

My wife and I just had our first child. No significant delays,
generally good care. We did pay for a doula to help us through the
process, but midwives are covered in some areas and that might be an
option for next time.

I've got a friend who is considering hiring a midwife. Was it expensive and
did you find his/her services worthwhile?

[HeyBub[_3_]]

Cooniedog wrote:
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have
months and even years of delays before they receive treatments for
some illnesses.
I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Cooniedawg

Two observations:

* My GE rep tells me there are more MRI machines in Seattle than there are
in all of Canada - and Seattle is not known to be the MRI capitol of the
hemisphere. I shudder to think how many MRI machines there are in my town,
Houston, what with 28 hospitals and two medical schools on just one medical
center campus.

* My internist tells the story of a lab tech at his residency hospital in
Chicago. Her mother, a Canadian, suddenly went blind. Inital tests revealed
a tumor on the optic nerve. The CHS denied any further treatment, but would
pay for a nursing home. In other words, they looked at a chart: 79-year old
woman, brain cancer. Nope. No-can-do.

The tech told that story to a Neurologist on staff and he said that malady
is fairly common, that the tumor is probably benign, and that removing it
was a 30-minute procedure (they do it laproscopically through the nasal
passage). Further, he said if momma could get to Chicago, he'd do the
procedure for free.

The tech fetched mom to Chicago, and the tumor was removed on an out-patient
basis. Mom could see again and the total bill was about $5,000 for the
hospital facilities.

Point is, in the CHS they have benefit-to-cost ratio charts that deterine,
in many cases, the course of treatment.

Couple of other observations:

* We hear that medicines are cheaper in Canada. That's generally true with
two exceptions: 1) While brand names may be cheaper (Plavix, Zantax, etc.),
generics are often more expensive. 2) Some medicines are NOT in the Canadian
formulary. The government refuses to dispense them because of cost when
alternatives are available even though the alternatives are not quite as
effective.

* Abortions are free in Canada, but there is an eleven-month waiting list
(It's a JOKE, son.).

* The survival rate for many chronic diseases (breast cancer, for example)
is MUCH greater in the U.S. than in Canada.

[Steve Turner]

HeyBub wrote:
* Abortions are free in Canada, but there is an eleven-month waiting list
(It's a JOKE, son.).

http://www.rosswalker.co.uk/tv_sound...s_a_joke_x.wav

--
Free bad advice available here.
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

[Cooniedog]

I've seen "Sicko" that's what got me to thinking about our rotten health
care here in the U. S. of A.

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have
months and even years of delays before they receive treatments for
some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko" for
a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.

[Cooniedog]

It would seem that the U.S. is definitely headed toward some kind of
nationalized health care and all the doctor organizations, insurance and
pharmaceutical companies are dead set against it.

To my way of thinking anything that those entities listed above are
against I'm for since they have done nothing but increase our costs of
health care and more and more Americans can't seem to afford any health
care at all.

This thinking then begged the question, "How do the Canadians and Brits
feel about their nationalized health care plans."

Upscale wrote:
"Cooniedog" wrote in message
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I'll answer your question the best I can, but it's definitely not a
woodworking question. It's also a difficult question to answer. It's true,
that in some cases, there's an extremely large waiting list for treatment.
It's not an outright refusal of healthcare, just a fact that someone may
have to wait years for treatment. Some might argue that it's another way to
refuse help. Many Canadians who can afford it, choose to go to the USA and
pay for treatment they might have to wait years for in Canada. That part is
certainly true.

There are certain cases where some individuals have been denied healthcare
primarily on the basis that there's only so much money to go around and that
it's considered more prudent to direct funds where the greatest number of
individuals can be treated. A simple example of this (and many of these
cases are in the courts) is funding for special education for autistic
children. I believe the Ontario courts ruled that funding ends for those
children six years or older even though it's agreed that they'd still
benefit from this education. I'm not prepared to argue for or against the
morality of any of this.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/...m-ontario.html

Another example and something I consider to be health care is dentistry.
It's not covered by general healthcare anywhere that I'm aware of in Canada,
yet it's agreed that poor dental care can result in a host of diseases ~
diabetes for example. So, yes simple example would confirm that some types
of healthcare are not funded.

So, maybe the answer to your question is yes to both questions. But it's too
complicated question to answer outright. There's always going to be
exceptions to every argument and there's always a host of variables to
consider when answering it. Personally, I have a host of medical
difficulties. I'm not going to go into details, but for the problems I've
had and currently have, I feel I have a great deal of experience with the
Ontario healthcare system. Does that make me an expert? I wouldn't think so,
but for the average person walking around, I think my experiences eclipse
most of what the general public has experienced. Anyways, that's the way I
feel whether it's factually true or not.

Why the question?

[Chris Friesen]

Upscale wrote:
"Chris Friesen" wrote in message
Health care is locally governed, so there are going to be regional
differences. For reference, I'm in my 30s, and live in Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan, Canada, a city of a bit over 200000 people.

What's the physician availability like there Chris?

Around here, it's no problem. Some of the smaller towns are having a
real difficulty, and up north it's a big deal. I think some of the
larger cities are having problems with this as many MDs are specializing
because they can make more money with less work. I understand that some
family docs have a sideline of cosmetic surgery work to bring in some
extra cash--there has been discussion about the possibility of conflict
of interest when the same doctor is practicing both privately and publicly.

My wife and I just had our first child. No significant delays,
generally good care. We did pay for a doula to help us through the
process, but midwives are covered in some areas and that might be an
option for next time.

I've got a friend who is considering hiring a midwife. Was it expensive and
did you find his/her services worthwhile?

I may be biased, my mom is a midwife.

To clarify, doulas and midwives are two different things. A doula is
like a birth coach, she (usually it's a woman) is there primarily to
help the individual mother. (As opposed to the hospital staff, who are
handling multiple mothers and are worried primarily about physical
rather than mental wellbeing.) Doulas are in addition to the regular
obstetrician.

A midwife generally replaces an obstetrician. They generally handle
low-risk births. They are generally willing to do home births if there
are no complications, they have hospital admitting privileges, can
prescribe medications, and they generally spend more time on each
individual patient than an obstetrician does. The wikipedia article on
midwifery is fairly good.

As for expense, it's going to vary by area. I have no idea what the
going rate for a midwife is.

Chris

[David Nebenzahl]

On 5/13/2009 3:40 PM Cooniedog spake thus:

It would seem that the U.S. is definitely headed toward some kind of
nationalized health care and all the doctor organizations, insurance and
pharmaceutical companies are dead set against it.

True what you said except for the doctors part: many doctors, probably a
plurality, are actually strongly in favor of a single-payer system or
something close to it. (Their organizations, like the AMA, of course are
probably trailing this opinion by quite a bit.)


--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism

[evodawg[_2_]]

wrote:

On Wed, 13 May 2009 14:29:04 -0500, "Upscale"
wrote:


"Cooniedog" wrote in message
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I'll answer your question the best I can, but it's definitely not a
woodworking question. It's also a difficult question to answer. It's true,
that in some cases, there's an extremely large waiting list for treatment.
It's not an outright refusal of healthcare, just a fact that someone may
have to wait years for treatment. Some might argue that it's another way
to
refuse help. Many Canadians who can afford it, choose to go to the USA
and pay for treatment they might have to wait years for in Canada. That
part is certainly true.

There are certain cases where some individuals have been denied healthcare
primarily on the basis that there's only so much money to go around and
that
it's considered more prudent to direct funds where the greatest number of
individuals can be treated. A simple example of this (and many of these
cases are in the courts) is funding for special education for autistic
children. I believe the Ontario courts ruled that funding ends for those
children six years or older even though it's agreed that they'd still
benefit from this education. I'm not prepared to argue for or against the
morality of any of this.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/...m-ontario.html

Another example and something I consider to be health care is dentistry.
It's not covered by general healthcare anywhere that I'm aware of in
Canada, yet it's agreed that poor dental care can result in a host of
diseases ~ diabetes for example. So, yes simple example would confirm that
some types of healthcare are not funded.

So, maybe the answer to your question is yes to both questions. But it's
too complicated question to answer outright. There's always going to be
exceptions to every argument and there's always a host of variables to
consider when answering it. Personally, I have a host of medical
difficulties. I'm not going to go into details, but for the problems I've
had and currently have, I feel I have a great deal of experience with the
Ontario healthcare system. Does that make me an expert? I wouldn't think
so, but for the average person walking around, I think my experiences
eclipse most of what the general public has experienced. Anyways, that's
the way I feel whether it's factually true or not.

From Manitoba that runs health care a shade differently than Ontario,
every sentence is more or less true. I'll add that for life
threatening issues you get bumped forward but not in front of someone
who is dieing faster than you. Unless you seem to be important like
a weasel politician and his family or a sports player: then you go to
front of the line and spare no expense. I have noticed that people
with money go to the US, Mexico, or Europe because for cash up front,
no one has to wait. And there are some procedues that have long
lists because of resource allocations. And there are some things not
covered because of extreme high costs. Getting bitten by a mountain
(north slope) jumping spider from Peru comes to mind ): My doctor
came up with that one.

Dental, eye glasses, hearing aids, and most drugs are not covered
unless your in prison or on welfare where most all of it is covered.
Lets face it - if you get sent to prison for life (8 yrs) we want you
healthy enuff to do the time.

I once asked a dermatologist why it took so long and cost so much. He
said the admin costs ran at about 85% and that doctors got the
remaining 15%. I assume the 85 included hospital costs and that he
wasn't slinging me a line.

If I sound a tad cynical over this it is because the system has
inequities. We hire nurses part time and burn them out working
double shifts. Somehow paying parttime overtime is cheaper that
paying benefits. We don't allow private services to open shop because
that would jeapardize publice health care and all the doctors would
flock over to the dark side. When a small community raises money for
an MRI machine we don't let it get hooked up because it wasn't
budgeted for, it's in the wrong community, and we want things
centralized. The list goes on.

Yes, there is a whole lot more to this and it gets complicated and
it's not nessessarily about how much money, but more like who gets to
touch the money first and dole it out.

Canadians want pay what the market will bear (if you can). Americans
want pay what's fair (if you can get it). Seems we both want what the
other has.

P
sounds to me like a big political scam. The same will happen in the US or
worse. The White House says restore all benefits and pay and rehire all
fired union workers or lose the Stimulate Package. Have a funny feeling
that only union workers will benefit by this Health Care Crap.
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

[Swingman]

wrote:

I have no idea what it would take to fix any of it. Personally, I
don't believe it can be fixed. I think it's too far gone.

Last time it worked in this country was when doctors lived in the
neighborhood and there were no insurance companies, or government,
involved ... way back when there was no concept of a "right" to medical
care and the inevitabilities of life were gracefully accepted.

.... I was there, and lived it.

Ironic, these "rights" we have been boondoggled, in ignorance, into
cherishing as inalienable, eh?

There is little doubt that history will prove the "right" of every
citizen to vote in this country will be at the very root of its downfall
... it certainly wasn't set up that way.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

[Tom Watson]

On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:00:38 -0500, Swingman wrote:

wrote:

I have no idea what it would take to fix any of it. Personally, I
don't believe it can be fixed. I think it's too far gone.

Last time it worked in this country was when doctors lived in the
neighborhood and there were no insurance companies, or government,
involved ... way back when there was no concept of a "right" to medical
care and the inevitabilities of life were gracefully accepted.

... I was there, and lived it.

Ironic, these "rights" we have been boondoggled, in ignorance, into
cherishing as inalienable, eh?

There is little doubt that history will prove the "right" of every
citizen to vote in this country will be at the very root of its downfall
.. it certainly wasn't set up that way.


Just received this email:


Good afternoon,

You are receiving this email because you signed up at WhiteHouse.gov.
My staff and I plan to use these messages as a way to directly
communicate about important issues and opportunities, and today I have
some encouraging updates about health care reform.

The Vice President and I just met with leaders from the House of
Representatives and received their commitment to pass a comprehensive
health care reform bill by July 31.

We also have an unprecedented commitment from health care industry
leaders, many of whom opposed health reform in the past. Monday, I met
with some of these health care stakeholders, and they pledged to do
their part to reduce the health care spending growth rate, saving more
than two trillion dollars over the next ten years -- around $2,500 for
each American family. Then on Tuesday, leaders from some of America's
top companies came to the White House to showcase innovative ways to
reduce health care costs by improving the health of their workers.

Now the House and Senate are beginning a critical debate that will
determine the health of our nation's economy and its families. This
process should be transparent and inclusive and its product must drive
down costs, assure quality and affordable health care for everyone,
and guarantee all of us a choice of doctors and plans.

Reforming health care should also involve you. Think of other people
who may want to stay up to date on health care reform and other
national issues and tell them to join us he

http://www.whitehouse.gov/EmailUpdates

Health care reform can't come soon enough. We spend more on health
care than any country, but families continue to struggle with
skyrocketing premiums and nearly 46 million are without insurance
entirely. It is a priority for the American people and a pillar of the
new foundation we are seeking to build for our economy.

We'll continue to keep you posted about this and other important
issues.

Thank you,
Barack Obama

P.S. If you'd like to get more in-depth information about health
reform and how you can participate, be sure to visit
http://www.HealthReform.gov.








This email was sent to
Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy

The White House · 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW · Washington, DC 20500 ·
202-456-1111

Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

[Larry[_7_]]

Swingman wrote in
:


There is little doubt that history will prove the "right"
of every citizen to vote in this country will be at the
very root of its downfall .. it certainly wasn't set up
that way.


You are absolutely correct. It started last November...

Larry

[Rusty[_3_]]

I have rarely heard of long waiting lists in Canada except when Americans
tell the story.If you have aggressive cancer or some other deadly illness
your in the hospital right now.Only reason I can see causing waiting lists
is lobbyists from the States trying to get some in power in our Gov. to take
payoffs and force us towards private care. Not going to happen. Would be a
great thing if it happens in America But Republican taking payoffs from
health care lobbyists and some of the not well informed buying there talking
points"Long line ups" "Can't chose your own Dr." "be afraid" "Iraq has
nuclear weapons". If your American just don't get sick or hurt, Me I'll just
rely on the great Canadian healthcare system.


"Cooniedog" wrote in message
...
I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great Britain.
They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying that Canadians
and Brits are refused certain health care or have months and even years of
delays before they receive treatments for some illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers of the
sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective countries
when it comes to health care.

Cooniedawg

[Doug Winterburn]

Swingman wrote:
wrote:

I have no idea what it would take to fix any of it. Personally, I
don't believe it can be fixed. I think it's too far gone.

Last time it worked in this country was when doctors lived in the
neighborhood and there were no insurance companies, or government,
involved ... way back when there was no concept of a "right" to medical
care and the inevitabilities of life were gracefully accepted.

... I was there, and lived it.

Ironic, these "rights" we have been boondoggled, in ignorance, into
cherishing as inalienable, eh?

There is little doubt that history will prove the "right" of every
citizen to vote in this country will be at the very root of its downfall
.. it certainly wasn't set up that way.

A Canadian snowbird friend explained another "string" in the CHS. He
must not only remain in Canada, but in his home province for at least 6
months of the year or lose his CHS benefits. Being retired and wanting
to travel not only around the world but in Canada, he doesn't care for
this part of the system.

[Upscale]

wrote in message
Overall, he sees the CA model not being nearly as good as it was, and
no improvement on the horizon. He expects it to get worse before it
gets better due to the fact that small taxes to subsidize the system
are extremely unpopular.

That I certainly agree with. 30 years ago at the age of 16, I had plastic
surgery done on a burn on my arm to make it less noticeable. Entirely a
cosmetic procedure. A referral from the family doctor to the plastic
surgeon, two weeks later the surgery was done and not a hint of a bill. That
kind of cosmetic service would never be funded these days. It seems there
was more money available for that kind of stuff then, maybe fewer patients
or less demand. Probably a combination of all three. Now, I think the first
criteria that is considered is it medically necessary coupled with cost.

I have no idea what it would take to fix any of it. Personally, I
don't believe it can be fixed. I think it's too far gone.

I'm sure you're right. There's just too much demand and too little money
available.

[LD]

"David G. Nagel" wrote in message
...
David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 5/13/2009 12:49 PM evodawg spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 12:34 PM evodawg spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 5/13/2009 9:31 AM Cooniedog spake thus:

I'm just curious about the health care systems in Canada & Great
Britain. They are currently running TV ads here in the States saying
that Canadians and Brits are refused certain health care or have
months
and even years of delays before they receive treatments for some
illnesses.

I for one, as an American, believe the is total BS put out by the
Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Companies of the U.S.

I would like to hear from some of the Canadian and British readers
of
the sawdust wreck about what it is really like you you respective
countries when it comes to health care.

Good questions. I suggest renting a copy of Michael Moore's "Sicko"
for
a good comparative look at health-care systems across the world.

That's the dumbest suggestion I've ever heard! He's about as accurate
as
Tim Geithner on his Income Taxes.

So please treat us to a short analysis of where, exactly, Moore is
wrong
about the badness of the U.S. health-care system as compared to other
countries. I look forward to this.

Won't even waste my time. Just keep watching another one of the made for
profit docudrama and claim its FACT! Moore is a buffoon!

I see you've chosen the Hannity/Limbaugh, et al, method of assertion by
bellowing--"it's true because I SAY IT IS and you're just a liberal
idiot".

Thanks for playing.


Several years ago the Prime Minister ( or Premier, I'm not sure which
title is correct) very proudly made an announcement that the waiting list
for coronary bypass surgery was down to ONLY 400 patients.


And last year in the UK they got the waiting Time for care of Critical
Cancer patients down to Six Months.

[Upscale]

"FrozenNorth" wrote in message
Depending upon the answer, they do have a Lee Valley in Saskatoon, so
you could move there.

Just to put it back on topic.

I actually considered moving to Saskatchewan at one point. All that flat
land and me hating hills so much. Now I'm glad I didn't. The land would be
flat, but I'd have been washed away in the floods.

[Charlie Self]

On May 13, 8:57*pm, Larry wrote:
Swingman wrote om:

There is little doubt that history will prove the "right"
of every citizen to vote in this country will be at the
very root of its downfall .. it certainly wasn't set up
that way.

You are absolutely correct. It started last November...

Larry

You need a history lesson.

[Leon]

wrote in message
...
Snip


You have shared just a bit of your challenges here. And I am not
being sarcastic... but just being able to understand the amount of
paperwork and levels of people to be dealt with in your situation make
you an expert in my opinion.

The health care system is a monster unto itself, no matter where you
are. At this point, I know more about M/M than I ever thought there
was to know. In the end, we still have to go to our extended care
provider for counseling on what to do to make sure the folks care is
covered. BUT... they cannot tell us what to do. They can only lay
out options. If the are caught coaching or counseling us, they can
lose the right to do business with M/M.

I have no idea what it would take to fix any of it. Personally, I
don't believe it can be fixed. I think it's too far gone.

Obviously, this is something that has been on my mind...

Robert


Robert, I think the answer is to eliminate the insurance industry from the
medical industry. Perhaps in San Antonio certainly in Houston there are TV
commercials paid for by particular "medical groups". These groups are most
often made up of select doctors, select clinics, select pharmacies, and
select hospitals. These groups DO NOT accept insurance and require you to
become a member of their group.

I never paid much attention to these commercials as they sounded like the
typical ambulance chaser attorney ad. Anyway 6 or 7 years ago I was
listening to a talk radio program that was focused on health care. A doctor
from one of these groups was the guest and they were taking listener phone
calls. The basic theme of the program that day was how to control and
afford health care. INSURANCE to the health care industry is similar to
the Labor Union and the Automobile business, they both costs through the
roof. Anyway you join the group for about $50-$75 per month for you whole
family and when you get sick you simply go to this "group". There is no
deductible or co-pay, you pay the full bill at the time of the procedure.
BUT the typical office visit is $15-$20, prescription drugs are a fraction
of the normal cost that you would normally pay if you did not have
insurance. Basically you pay a little more than an insurance co-pay but the
cost is till quite reasonable.

A listener phoned in to attest to how well these groups work out for his
family. His daughter was an up and coming tennis player, apparently she was
quite good. She injured her knee and had a persistent pain that would not
go away. They took her to their medical group and were told the bad news,
surgery would be needed, arthroscopic surgery. Long story short, $2800
later she was good to go. He indicated that he shopped around to get
competing prices from other doctors and hospitals for the same procedure and
with out insurance. IIRC the cost was going to be well in excess of
$18000.

Apparently these medical groups are doing well as I see more and more of
them in different fields, dentistry, family practice, eye care, etc,
advertising on TV more and more. From what the doctor indicated on the
radio show eliminating the insurance companies from the equation saves
everyone money. The doctors office does not need as many people to work the
paperwork to collect from insurance companies. Insurance claims are not
turned down because there are no insurance claims. Insurance rejections on
certain procedures are not turned down because there are no insurance
claims. There are no reductions of the amount paid for particular
procedures because there are no insurance claims. Cash flow is much better
as there is no longer a 2 -4 month wait for claims to be paid because there
is no insurance claim. These benefits all repeats themselves for the
pharmacies, and hospitals.
When the medical industry has to write off and spend billions to simply
deal with the insurance industry medical costs naturally go sky high.
With these medical groups you don't get treatment if you have no money so
non paying illegals crossing the border to have babies for free no longer
inflate the cost for medical care for the rest of us.

It used to work in the distant past, why not now? I suppose that the
typical citizen/ person working in the U.S. has come to expect to pay
nothing except a nothing or a small co-pay and let his employer foot the
bill for the insurance costs.