Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
The Misinformation About the Canadian Health Care System
Share:
by Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke | July 17, 2009 at 06:33 am
2067 views | 95 Recommendations | 53 comments
Photos
Videos
If you want socialized health care your an idiot_
sourced by Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke
For the past few days I have watched misinformation being bantered about in reference to the Canadian Health Care System. This article is not intended to sway anyone in the US on either side of the issue, but rather to set the record straight, as I see it.
The Republicans claim that the Obama Administration is trying to introduce a Canadian Style Health Care System. There are ads that claims that there are lotteries for doctors, long waiting lists, and the control over drugs that can be used.
While this may be true in some jurisdictions, I don't believe it to be true as a carde blanche rule. In some cases, where drug plans are available, doctors may be encouraged to prescribe generic drugs, but the patient always has the choice to go with the original if he/she is willing to pay for it.
From my perspective, the Administration's Health Care Plan is nowhere anything near what we have in Canada. Canada's Health Care is not operated as a National Health Care System, even though it is mandated under the Canada Health Act.
Jurisdictions in Canada (Provinces and Territories) are mandated to provide basic health care under the Canada Health Act. Each province provides its own health care. What that means is that when u move to another Province or Territory in Canada, you have to apply to be covered by that jurisdiction and there is normally a three months waiting period before you are covered by your new Province or Territory. The previous jurisdiction has to cover you during this waiting period.
For example, if I visit Manitoba, my Alberta health card is no good to me there should I have to visit a doctor. I have to claim those expenses once I return to Alberta and I will get reimbursed at the rate that Alberta provides for this procedure, as long as it is below Manitoba's rates. . That is why most Canadians will purchase supplementary insurance or travel insurance to cover any additional costs.
Some provinces have a drug plan, Alberta does not, except for Seniors, who are entitled to free Blue Cross coverage when they turn 65. Presently they pay roughly $25 for each prescription. This will soon change, since there will be a graduated plan, based on Seniors income.
Until recently, Alberta collected a $64 health care premium for each person. Employers normally covered half. Some jurisdictions collect a premium, while others don't. Many Canadians carry supplementary insurance to cover pharmaceuticals, ambulance service and some medical supplies.
For the most part, our Health Care Plans work well for the public. Is the system perfect? No, but neither are private plans in the US. Most waiting periods referred to are for elective surgery and non emergency MRIs or CT scans. In Alberta I have not heard of too many horror stories regarding this.
My doctor can order any lab work he deems necessary to diagnose me or to monitor me. The myth that he is being controlled by the province is just that. In the Alberta Health Region they also maintain electronic health records.
Drugs are readily available as required. In fact, for the most part, we pay less for the same drugs that are sold in the United States because our government negotiated drug prices. Thus a lot of American Seniors have used on line pharmacies or buses to Canada to get these cheaper drugs.
At the University of Alberta a lot of research is being done especially as far as cancer, cardiology and diabetes. We believe we have the best researchers doing good work in that institution. Much of that research is funded by the government.
Are there problems with the system? Of course, governments must set budget priorities and as such they determine what they cover above and beyond what is mandated by the Canada Health Act.
There is also a doctor shortage, in Alberta, mostly in rural areas. In Redwater all three doctors are from South Africa. I believe they are doing a great job as General Practicioners. Accessibility to Specialists is not a problem. The difference here is that you need the GPs referral. Personally, I have never waited very long for an appointment.
Recently I requested an MRI (non emergency), the appointment was within ten days. I had to cancel and reschedule and was told by some it would take a long time. Not so, I was rescheduled within a week.
In summary, while not perfect, the the Canadian Health Care System works for most Canadians. Decisions by governments on coverage and infrastructure does affect it. I think so will decisions by private providers who have to make a profit and are accountable to their stockholders.
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most Recommended Comment
Crowd Power
Roy C
Vancouver, Washington, United States
Related Stories
Recommendations (95)
Barbara McPherson
Nanaimo, Canada
The_Cynic
Freddy Beach, Where the deer r, Canada
politisite
Columbia, South Carolina, United States
francislholland
Brazil
Blue Crush
Toronto, Canada
Samir Joshi
Vadodara, Gujarat, India
Babel-Fish
Negros Oriental, Philippines
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (53)
at 07:18 on July 17th, 2009
well said
at 07:19 on July 17th, 2009
Thank you marianmo:).
at 07:42 on July 17th, 2009
Good post ACP. Thank you.
at 07:44 on July 17th, 2009
Thank you Paschen.
at 07:49 on July 17th, 2009
Wow, I didn't know that about medical care in another province. I never really thought about it, I guess.
I have been grateful so many times that I live in Canada, because when I am feeling particularly unwell, I don't have to gamble on whether I might have something serious, I just get it checked out. I don't have to stress that, "Well, it might be something that's going to kill me, but it's probably not, and I can't really afford to find out until I really think it might kill me." Of course I don't go to the doctor for everything - especially with the new health line where you can call and talk to someone who can tell you whether or not you ought to visit a doctor - but there are plenty of times where I would have just suffered in ignorance if I had had to pay. And that could be very dangerous.
It's very likely that the increased wait times people talk about is due to the fact that more people are getting themselves to a doctor more often. Worth it? I think so, but then again, I've been sick a lot. And the wait times really don't seem bad to me - perhaps because I've never had anything else? Up to you guys, obviously, but I love the Canadian system.
at 08:09 on July 17th, 2009
Parmeison, I only know that because I have lived in several provinces and had to go through the procedures. Normally getting health care in another province when you.re traveling is not a major problem. They will wait for payment until you can claim it from your home province. I had to jump through some hoops when we got emergency medical treatment in the US.
When we came home we applied to the province, they paid at their rate, then I had to claim the rest from another plan I had. It just took longer to get the money back.
at 07:56 on July 17th, 2009
In order to have a meaningful and effective reform, we need real information, not propaganda. We need detailed descriptions of the Canadian, British, Dutch, French, and German systems, for example.
But what we have been getting is propaganda from the left for their overly-hurried project, with enormous consequences, and no public discussion, and politicians who want us to back a bill that they haven't even read themselves.
The right does present some good information on the successful treatment of cancer, comparing us with other countries.
In those terms, we have the better system. But, for those who go broke, the working poor specifically, a system that bankrupts you is not a good system.
We do need wellness programs which will pay doctors and patients for adopting behaviors that keep people out of the system by discouraging bad behavior and rewarding good behavior.
As Obama said, if we went back to the obesity rates of the early '80s, we would save hundreds of billions of dollars right there.
So, some kind of private-public arrangement needs to be worked out. We need to be well-informed as to the advantages and disadvantages of every approach, and then we choose.
That is not what has been happening.
at 08:04 on July 17th, 2009
Roy I totally agree with you. Rushing something through haphazard because it may be the politically opportune thing to do will only bite you in the butt in the end.
There are lots of public systems around the world that can be studied. The US send a guy to the moon, with the right attitude you can develop a health care system that will be almost perfect and that works for everyone.
at 08:27 on July 17th, 2009
What I have below is a good example of the difference between populism and conservatism, especially the country club Republican kind, and between liberal welfare state and libertarian principles.
Of the several things that really pissed me off about Bush, I will mention his drug plan for seniors.
We got a plan from Bush for Medicare for prescription drugs for those on Social Security, usually over 65, sometimes over 62.
What had been happening was that the drugs were priced so high that seniors were going broke buying them. They began buying them from Canada over the Internet or by phone or even from Mexico.
So, what did the Bushel do?
Heh, heh! The Bushel saved the drug companies from being forced to sell to senior as a discount by letting the taxpayer foot the bill, preserving the "free market". WTF?
How do you save the "free market" by subsidizing the purchase of a commodity but not negotiating a discount now that you have subsidized the purchase?
No, this was a way to pump money to the drug companies.
Everyone should know that something like 90% of the money that goes into scientific research in the US is taxpayer money. Then what is done is some scientist leaves the university and does the last few patents privately so that someone can make a ton of money on the stuff.
The point is that we the taxpayer get robbed of the value of our investment, and, then, on top of it, we get robbed a second time when we pay "free market" prices for drugs that our government has subsidized for purchase.
at 08:32 on July 17th, 2009
Thanks very much for this Roy:). Amazing what lobbyists can accomplish in Washington. Maybe a restriction on moving any research over to a private firm should exist if the research is done at a university with taxpayer money.
at 08:42 on July 17th, 2009
You would think that with an army of liberal journalists, someone would have said all this already. The problem is that the liberal journalist also believes, as does big business, in the end, in big CENTRALIZED government.
They are elitists with character structures big on ego-control and not particularly well-informed about science and medicine, by the way. They couldn't explain why and how water boils, but they all know the "human-caused global warming is true".
Since as libs they suffer from a compulsion to eliminate suffering derived out of tremendous guilt complexes, they push for the fastest solution that they in their liberal pea-brains can understand: nationalize it!
The complexities of scientific research, such a funding, patent rights, needed and unneeded profits, this is all beyond them.
Hey, that is why we need Citizen Journalists!
at 08:51 on July 17th, 2009
Thanks for this Roy:).
at 08:56 on July 17th, 2009
I agree with you and I see the health care system the way you see it - good piece.
at 09:00 on July 17th, 2009
Thanks very much Amy:) Nice to get another Canadian voice agreeing:)
at 12:07 on July 17th, 2009
I, personally, have picked up refugees from your health system at PDX, here so they could get treatment in our system.
Your "statistics" about our system are propaganda from the UN's WHO, which hates the US. You believe it because you are happy with your system, but those refugees from Canadian Health Care don't.
I also experienced the health care plan of Italy for a decade. Very, very spotty. WHO rated their care better than US care. That is pure BS. I had a young lady in my ESL class with a leg cut off above her knee because the Italians were too slow getting to her cancer and the doctors in Dallas, Texas, could not save the leg.
Why, even if unhappy with our system, should we just jump without discussion, without being allowed to put in our point of view, without addressing funding issues, and why would we jump if required to sign up for a system not even as good as Canada's province by province system?
I actually get tired of being told I am so supposed to be tired with our system. I know exactly how tired I am of it, and I know what I want to keep and want I don't.
If ill, I would still rather be here. I have insurance and don't want some idiot in Washington to have me spend more to have less.
at 12:28 on July 17th, 2009
Roy, I agree with some aspects of your comments and I won't deny that some people go to the States to get certain treatments that just aren't available in Canada. Recently, I ran into a long time friend who was diagnosed with prostate cancer and there was a new treatment in California, which eventually cured him. It cost him $70,000. He is now in the process of trying to get the Province of Alberta to pay for it.
On the other hand, I also know that sometimes when the Province had tried to cut costs by permitting some private clinics to operate, there has been a public outcry to preserver our system, even though there would have been no change in the way people would have been treated, i.e. treatments would have been given by presented your Alberta Health Care card.
Canadians for the most part are happy with the system we have and it works for us.
I also agree that this should not be rushed through in the U.S. I am suspicious of any bureaucracy that the federal government wants to set up.
I recently talked to someone that is not insured. That person qualifies for county coverage. The problem was that the tests the doctor needed had to be approved by the State. It was interesting to note, even though they have a fee rate up on a website in that State, the cost, because it was state funded well exceeded that, if even approved.
I say again, take your time to to get it right, don't jam it through. What you can jam through now is a bill that pays for the 47 Million uninsured, which I understand, when you take away the wealthy that don.t want insurance is only about 20 Million.
at 12:38 on July 17th, 2009
Yes.
I will suggest two ways to cut costs immediately.
One is to make the tort system so it operates as it does in the UK and I presume in Canada. If you lose, you pay the costs for the other side.
That would stop billions of dollars of BS lawsuits.
The second would be to eliminate most of the illegal population. They work here for minimum wage and less and lower our wages and get medical care for free. The cost is tacked onto our bills.
Without illegals, wages would go up, and there would be more insured, more able to buy their own and more paid into the tax system.
at 14:45 on July 17th, 2009
Funny. I would like to know how you would "eliminate" the "illegal population".
at 16:21 on July 17th, 2009
Well, you make all employers use "E-verify" which tells them whether the person is legal or not.
That simple.
at 10:40 on July 17th, 2009
Thank you for reading and commenting.
at 10:50 on July 17th, 2009
ACP, Thanks for the GREAT story, news without a spin on it is sorely lacking in the mainstream media today.
Roy, Great comments, I think the poor news is adding to the problems. It allows our elected politicians to do a ½ A** job and still get reelected, because most of the people that will vote don't realize how bad some of the laws coming out of washington or their state capitols actualy are.
at 10:55 on July 17th, 2009
Thanks for your comments Spydermonkey. I just had to get it off my chest. LOL
at 12:06 on July 17th, 2009
Thanks for the compliments.
at 13:13 on July 17th, 2009
A lot of good information.
at 13:30 on July 17th, 2009
Alberta does not have a pharmacare plan except for Seniors. My private plan, which I pay for myself, is a group plan, that covers all drugs and some other procedures. I can't speak for Nova Scotia, so I don.t know the coverage there. The Blue Cross plan Alberta has works well, but will be cascaded in future for Seniors.
I'm not sure which new illnesses or private insurance your are referring to.
at 13:57 on July 17th, 2009
Ok understood Sara, I have a different plan "Public Service Health Care Plan" which covers my drugs. It is a plan carried into retirement.
The Blue Cross plan for Seniors I was talking about is underwritten by the Province of Alberta. With the new drug plan for Seniors being introduced in Alberta next January, I believe, this plan will be income based. Based on income it will be either free or a premium will be charged cascaded according to income.
at 18:02 on July 17th, 2009
It covers 80% of my drugs. I have paid into that fund since I was 18. This plan is no different then what the Auto Workers Union, Ontario Teachers Association gets and many other Union employees get.
at 13:34 on July 17th, 2009
SS, "they cover only new illnesses, not ones we already have"
The insurance companies will cover treatment of many conditions after one year of "uninterupted coverage", but that is for coverage thru an employer, I'd have to ask my dad (retired agent) for the typical limitations on private health insurance.
Duh, U'r in Canadia, I forgot :(
at 13:33 on July 17th, 2009
I think Sara was referring to something in Canada. Maybe I'm mistaken.
at 13:34 on July 17th, 2009
LOL almost instant meassaging :)