Canadian Medical Association: Canadian health care system is imploding, is not sustainable

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.

Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country ... recognize that changes must be made.

"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

...

Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA ... believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.

He has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget.

...

"(Canadians) have to understand that the system that we have right now - if it keeps on going without change - is not sustainable," said Doig.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...D335rGu_Z3KXoQw

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Oh great! More illegals coming from the Great White North to leech on our healthcare!

[Danno 1,228]

How is it folks from Canada... who never miss a chance to tell us how great "The system" is up there.... failed to address this post?

This is just as I suspected, the free-loaders are happy fur-sure and they could care less if they system is going broke, just so they get their Pimple cream for free.

Comments please!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

How is it folks from Canada... who never miss a chance to tell us how great "The system" is up there.... failed to address this post?

This is just as I suspected, the free-loaders are happy fur-sure and they could care less if they system is going broke, just so they get their Pimple cream for free.

Comments please!

Pimple cream, lol.

No, they just pay retail for it at Shoppers.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

An additional part of the article I did not excerpt above, but might be interesting in light of another conversation happening right now in another thread:

[Ouellet] ... has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said.

[Krikit 1,165]

Oh noes. Not another thread about how crappy Canadian healthcare is. I'm just saying...

Oops. Wrong thread!

[Ban Hammer 13,676]

How is it folks from Canada... who never miss a chance to tell us how great "The system" is up there.... failed to address this post?

This is just as I suspected, the free-loaders are happy fur-sure and they could care less if they system is going broke, just so they get their Pimple cream for free.

Comments please!

they are too busy clubbing seals to answer.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Oh noes. Not another thread about how crappy Canadian healthcare is. I'm just saying...

Oops. Wrong thread!

The opinions are from Canadian doctors, not evil capitalist Amurkins.

And my reading of it isn't that Canadian health care is "crappy", just unsustainable.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Oh noes. Not another thread about how crappy Canadian healthcare is. I'm just saying...

Oops. Wrong thread!

The opinions are from Canadian doctors, not evil capitalist Amurkins.

And my reading of it isn't that Canadian health care is "crappy", just unsustainable.

It can be sustained a long time if you just pay more into the system as needed. Of course the taxes will go up but "Free" health care is not cheap.

[rebeccajo 14]

An additional part of the article I did not excerpt above, but might be interesting in light of another conversation happening right now in another thread:

[Ouellet] ... has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said.

"Activity based" funding isn't the same thing as going fee-for-service.

Fee for service means I can bill the insurance company for each step of a patients treatment.

"Activity based" implies something like - we are gonna pay the hospital $10000 for a birth as opposed to fee-for-service billing where every provider who touches the woman or child during the procedure gets to bill for little bits that add up fast.

In a socialized model, I can imagine this might be more cost effective than throwing so many thousands of dollars per year per patient based on the demographics of the hospital.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

While the Canadian system isn't perfect it is far superior to anything that currently exists in the US. Canada is at least willing to address any problems that may exist in its social services - such as it did for its equivalent of social security a few years back so that now it is totally sustainable - and address them to keep them viable. Any good system is not going to be static - it will evolve and address the real needs of its users. It needs to be responsive enough so that when problems develop they are addressed and resolved so that they no longer become problems. Here in the US the objective seems to be 'let's bury our heads in the sand and say that everything is perfect because it is the USA' while thousands go bankrupt each year because they have no insurance, their insurance decides to cut them off or they do have insurance and their medical costs far exceeds their abilities to address. The only winners in the US are the insurance companies themselves who reap in obscene profits from the pockets of the US citizens while making a pretense of providing any type of real service. The solution I see so many here promote seems to be "if they can't afford it, then they should die". The lack of compassion is appalling and I find myself believing that only when these individuals find themselves in the same shoes as their less fortunate citizens they might possibly begin to understand. It seems Ebeneezer Scrooge is alive and well in the good ole' USofA.

Edited August 18, 2009 by Kathryn41

[luckytxn 2,265]

While the Canadian system isn't perfect it is far superior to anything that currently exists in the US. Canada is at least willing to address any problems that may exist in its social services - such as it did for its equivalent of social security a few years back so that now it is totally sustainable - and address them to keep them viable. Any good system is not going to be static - it will evolve and address the real needs of its users. It needs to be responsive enough so that when problems develop they are addressed and resolved so that they no longer become problems. Here in the US the objective seems to be 'let's bury our heads in the sand and say that everything is perfect because it is the USA' while thousands go bankrupt each year because they have no insurance, their insurance decides to cut them off or they do have insurance and their medical costs far exceeds their abilities to address. The only winners in the US are the insurance companies themselves who reap in obscene profits from the pockets of the US citizens while making a pretense of providing any type of real service. The solution I see so many here promote seems to be "if they can't afford it, then they should die". The lack of compassion is appalling and I find myself believing that only when these individuals find themselves in the same shoes as their less fortunate citizens they might possibly begin to understand. It seems Ebeneezer Scrooge is alive and well in the good ole' USofA.

Yeah the bad old companies so lets just Socialize everything. After all I come from another country and we do it all that way so I demand we do it here since I now want to live here.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

An additional part of the article I did not excerpt above, but might be interesting in light of another conversation happening right now in another thread:

[Ouellet] ... has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said.

The problem there being, you end up giving the institution carte-blanch, and remove the restriction of a budget. So much for cost savings over all.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Coming from another country I am in a far better position than you are to see the disparities of what exists in the US. Sometimes having greater experiences provide you with greater awareness and understanding. I can see what is missing here in the US because I have something to compare it to that does work. It is not a matter of 'socializing' things - it is a matter of finding the right balance between meeting the needs of the public using the system and the needs of the those providing the service. Right now it is heavy-weighted on the side of the providers and is not meeting the needs of those it is supposed to be serving. (And just to clarify, I am talking about the US system, not the Canadian system).

Edited August 18, 2009 by Kathryn41

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

As long as med students graduate with debt burdens of 100K and don't get to be real doctors till they're near 30 (4 years of pre-med + 4 years of med school + 2/3 years of residency), they will "need" to make a lot of money to make their investment worthwhile.