Western European, Scandinavian, Candian P&N readers -- Health Care Question

[lsquare]

I live in Canada and I think the medical system is pretty good.

good parts
I had to be rushed to the hospital twice in the past couple of years. Total cost was $700 for the ambulance rides because I don't have insurance. Medical care was good both times.

My mom has spent a lot of time in the hospital over the past couple of decades. She had several surgeries for intestinal problems as well as foot surgery for some bone growth thing. She hasn't paid anything for any of this. She's doing quite well these days.

My best friend had a motorcycle accident that shattered one of his arms and had a normal break in the other arm. One arm was put in a cast as usual while the other had major surgery to be put back together. He has a metal plate and pins in his arm, and his arm is no longer straight. The entire thing was free.

My cousin had a similar incident with broken arms and pins. Entire thing was free.

bad parts
Dental care is not covered by UHC. Even with insurance, my braces were about $2500. Luckily my parents have above average incomes and could afford to pay for this luxury. Not everyone can pay for this kind of thing, so some people still have really fucked up teeth. My friend with the pins in his arm has a father who can't stop wasting money on stupid shit, so my friend never got braces as a kid. His teeth are horrible and he has migraine headaches because of it. He's currently saving his money so he can afford oral surgery.

Procedures that are not seen as important have significant wait times. While heart surgery or intestine surgery can be booked and finished within 2 days, getting surgery to remove a bone growth from your foot takes months. Things like hip and knee replacements are seen as optional, so you wait.

Fucking old people abuse this. One of my friends is a nurse and she deals with these shit bags all the time. My own grandma was such a piece of shit that she called 911 several times because "I like the hospital more than the retirement home". Well thanks for wasting our resources, grandma. I'm sure people who actually need an ambulance right now appreciate your selfishness.


what I would fix
Dental care should be covered by UHC. Seriously, you can't possibly understand how important dental care is until you have a problem. My parents paid a shit load of money for oral surgery to have my wisdom teeth taken out. People who don't have that kind of money just need to deal with impacted molars. Have fun trying to be a productive member of society when you can't sleep because you have migraine headaches.

Agreed! A friend of mine is currently in Hong Kong and she asked me to go and give something to her older brother. I went to see him yesterday and his smile just scares the shit out of me. His upper front teeths are completely wacked. I wouldn't know how to describe it. It's no wonder why he's single. lol!

On a serious note, I do agree with you for the most part. A problem for Canada is that there are not enough doctors. With the population aging and the education system producing less and less doctors, the existing supply of doctors have to deal and treat more people on average than their counterparts 30-40 years ago. This was mentioned in a CBC news segment couple of years ago.

 

[lsquare]

Tommy Douglas died more than 20 years ago.. He helped (as in did most of the work ) bring Canada's current medical system into practise in the 60's. It has been going strong for 50 years... why would you figure it won't be able to for another 20?

There's no doubt in my mind that the Canadian health care system will change in time. There will be even more private participation in the system. It's inevitable given the rising costs of health care. The current rate is becoming ever unsustainable. The Canadian population is aging rapidly and with the baby boomers retiring in the near future, more and more of those guys will be using the health care system. Something will have to give in the next decade or so. Unless our workforce increase substantially, I have no doubts that reforms will be made unless taxes are increased.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

It's obvious to everyone (except you, maybe) that this was a response to my post in another thread. The statements you made in the OP, which you state were alleged in another thread, are obvious bastardizations of what I actually said. People responded indignantly until I posted what was actually said.

I didn't really intend it as a response to your post in that thread. I just wanted to start a new thread to discuss the four issues regardless of raised them or made the claim. I needed a new thread so that I could have a title that would attract people from the target countries.

You have not posted anything in support of either system. I made some statements based on my experiences - nothing more. It seems that most people from the countries I mentioned agreed with me. I'm advocating nothing but the truth and the application of thought before we dive headfirst into a big mess in the name of "reform."

OK, fair enough. My reading of the responses in this thread is that people think it isn't perfect, but aren't clamoring for real capitalist medicine or anything that resembles the American system, which they probably regard as nightmarish. I don't think anyone posted and said, "I really admire the American system," or "We need real capitalist health care."

 

[CycloWizard]

I didn't really intend it as a response to your post in that thread. I just wanted to start a new thread to discuss the four issues regardless of raised them or made the claim. I needed a new thread so that I could have a title that would attract people from the target countries.

So you made up statements which you knew would be attributed to me as a basis for a new thread. Great.

OK, fair enough. My reading of the responses in this thread is that people think it isn't perfect, but aren't clamoring for real capitalist medicine or anything that resembles the American system, which they probably regard as nightmarish. I don't think anyone posted and said, "I really admire the American system," or "We need real capitalist health care."

Nor have I heard anyone saying that their system is great and wouldn't change a thing. Looks like no country really has a great system, including the US. You have simply neglected the other side of the coin because you can't see it from your position.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Regarding the Canadian system, is it possible that the Canadian system is inferior to other nation's system, such as the British and French systems?

If we were to conclude that real socialized medicine were less than ideal, how would that guide us in reforming the American system? Would that mean that we should stay the course and watch as health care expenses explode to 30% of our GDP? Would it mean that we adopt real capitalist medicine and watch as hundreds of thousands of Americans suffer and die from lack of health care?

It's easy to critique other systems, but it's much harder to suggest a solution to the United States' problem.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

So you made up statements which you knew would be attributed to me as a basis for a new thread. Great.

Having them attributed to you wasn't my intent.

Nor have I heard anyone saying that their system is great and wouldn't change a thing. Looks like no country really has a great system, including the US. You have simply neglected the other side of the coin because you can't see it from your position.

I'm willing to acknowledge that socialized medicine isn't perfect. I just think it's far superior to what we have, less wasteful, and less expensive.

Why won't you just tell us what your solution to the United States' health care problem is. If it involves, "Don't get sick and if you do, die quickly," in some sort of a way then please just say so. If it means that hundreds of thousands of people would die from lack of health care, please say so.

 

[CycloWizard]

I'm willing to acknowledge that socialized medicine isn't perfect. I just think it's far superior to what we have, less wasteful, and less expensive.

"Socialized medicine" is a meaningless characterization which is thrown at lots of divergent systems. What about the systems that you characterize this way is far superior, less wasteful, and less expensive?

Why won't you just tell us what your solution to the United States' health care problem is. If it involves, "Don't get sick and if you do, die quickly," in some sort of a way then please just say so. If it means that hundreds of thousands of people would die from lack of health care, please say so.

Why are you poisoning the well despite everything I've said in this thread? You're obviously not interested in a real debate, only in disparaging anyone who might disagree with you. Your thinly-disguised troll thread has thus been exposed for what it is.

 

[McWatt]

1. contribute almost nothing to medical research and advancement
2. cannot pay for their health care system
3. has inferior health care and patient satisfaction than in the United States
4. had almost none of the world's best doctors.

1. As someone who has worked in medical research, I can say that Western Europe, particularly France, is a hotbed for the development of pharmaceuticals and medical devices.

2. The health care system in the United States pre-reform (and maybe much more so after reform) is the most expensive per patient in the world, so relatively speaking they're doing better than we are.

3. I know people with dual citizenship who travel to France (or India) for treatments/surgery. Anecdotal, so only take what you want from that.

4. I have no idea.

 

[lsquare]

So you made up statements which you knew would be attributed to me as a basis for a new thread. Great.

Nor have I heard anyone saying that their system is great and wouldn't change a thing. Looks like no country really has a great system, including the US. You have simply neglected the other side of the coin because you can't see it from your position.

Well, I wouldn't say that. If you have money, then medical care in the US can be great. Some of the most famous and best surgeons in the world lives and work in the US.

 

[lsquare]

Regarding the Canadian system, is it possible that the Canadian system is inferior to other nation's system, such as the British and French systems?

Well, I wouldn't say medical care in Canada is bad by any stretch of the word. For most conditions, Canadians can be assured that they'll get good quality care. Maybe for the most complicated and rare conditions would you need to see someone living in other parts of the world. Let make this clear to you, Canada is a first world country with a decent health care system. I say decent because of the problems that are developing such as waiting time and etc.

If we were to conclude that real socialized medicine were less than ideal, how would that guide us in reforming the American system? Would that mean that we should stay the course and watch as health care expenses explode to 30% of our GDP? Would it mean that we adopt real capitalist medicine and watch as hundreds of thousands of Americans suffer and die from lack of health care?

It's easy to critique other systems, but it's much harder to suggest a solution to the United States' problem.

I don't think you can prove that health care systems in socialist countries are necessarily inferior to that of the US. We're not seeing people dying in mass numbers in those countries. The solution for the US is to have a greater government involvement in the system. It's the best way to drive down costs. As you can see, the status quo is unacceptable. Too much government participation is a bad thing too. Look at Canada as an example. I would much prefer to have a hybrid solution where the market can play a role as well. It's not fair for people to have money to wait. It's not fair that some people are "abusing" the system by using more health care than others. Currently, I can't think of a country with a "perfect" system. Canadians and lots of Europeans are taxed unfairly to provide all of these social systems. I'm not advocating the complete destruction of social services, but there needs to be some sort of fairness. It's not fair that the young people have to pay more out of their hard earned dollars to support the lives of older and retired people.

 

[lsquare]

1. As someone who has worked in medical research, I can say that Western Europe, particularly France, is a hotbed for the development of pharmaceuticals and medical devices.

2. The health care system in the United States pre-reform (and maybe much more so after reform) is the most expensive per patient in the world, so relatively speaking they're doing better than we are.

3. I know people with dual citizenship who travel to France (or India) for treatments/surgery. Anecdotal, so only take what you want from that.

4. I have no idea.

I don't work in the medical field, but I have read and heard good things about French doctors. IIRC, a famous French surgeon went to North Korea to treat Kim Jong-il after he suffered a stroke about a year ago.

It's not out of the ordinary for Americans to go abroad to get good quality treatment. Thailand is also a good example. I read about Americans as well as Canadians flying to Bangkok to get treatment.

 

[CycloWizard]

Well, I wouldn't say that. If you have money, then medical care in the US can be great. Some of the most famous and best surgeons in the world lives and work in the US.

I said the system isn't great. The system is the vehicle by which healthcare is delivered and paid for. Healthcare in the US is top notch by any metric. The problems are in the delivery and payment for these services. That's the problem with labeling this mess as "healthcare reform" - we're not reforming healthcare at all, only the system by which it is delivered and paid for.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

"Socialized medicine" is a meaningless characterization which is thrown at lots of divergent systems. What about the systems that you characterize this way is far superior, less wasteful, and less expensive?

Those systems cost far less in terms of GDP and American dollars spent per capita while providing 100% coverage, having zero medical bankruptcies, and while not burdening businesses with health insurance issues.

I really don't see how they could not be superior to what we have here in the U.S. today. It would be difficult for them not to be.

Why are you poisoning the well despite everything I've said in this thread? You're obviously not interested in a real debate, only in disparaging anyone who might disagree with you. Your thinly-disguised troll thread has thus been exposed for what it is.

This isn't a troll thread! I legitimately wanted to see what people from those nations mentioned in the thread title had to say about those issues. How is requesting people's opinions on an issue they have first hand experience with (health care in their own countries) a troll thread?

I'm not sure what you're referring to when you accuse me of poisoning the well.

 

[biostud]

You will never be rejected from system, no matter income, job-status , and everyone have to pay for it through taxes. Sometimes you have to wait for operations, but life threatening diseases and cancer gets treated fast. You still have to pay for medicine but if you spend more than $200 a year the state will cover 50% and more than $400 a year and the state will cover 75% of the expenses.