Reality check: Canada's government health care system

**red92s** · 07-08-2009, 03:21 AM

Originally posted by nmboone View Post

I wanted to share this article because I think it's a good comparison between what one women went through and what I've went through with the US government system.

So . . . it sounds like, similar to the woman in the article, you would have been even worse off in the Canadian system. I don't doubt your treatment was expensive and your process long and difficult, but in reality, you probably wouldn't have faired much better as a resident of our neighbor to the north, which utilizes a system Obama and Michael Moore would like for the American people to believe is the end-all be-all of health care.

**kyrie** · 07-08-2009, 05:57 AM

Concur

The much-touted Canadian system is a joke. I have numerous relatives who are used to such treatment that we would find unacceptable. Extrememly long waits, lower quality, minimal care. I have all kinds of stories but needless to say, I'm not impressed and I don't want it!!!

**jordanzmom** · 07-13-2009, 05:26 AM

Ditto to the responses above. Just wait until you turn 60 years old and need a kidney transplant and the government says "no." Absolutely ridiculous to let the government have a say in my healthcare!

**getforfree** · 07-13-2009, 01:46 PM

It's better to have atl east some health coverage from goverment, than none at all, and then something happens and you have to declare bancrupcy. For me, paying premiums every months would be a waste of money, since I don't want to see a doctor unless I really have to. That's why insurance companies are in business, because people pay more than they get back. Right now I have free pregnancy medical, which covers only pregnancy, and my kids have free coverage due to low income. And it's much better than spending a few hundred a month.

**kyrie** · 07-15-2009, 04:29 AM

Paying

Ooooh but you DO pay and you would pay all the more in taxes, time and other measurable ways with so called "universal" government health care. Taxes are INCREDIBLY high in socialized states such as Canada. Not to mention the care that you do NOT get, and the drugs they will NOT pay for (but you may need!).
So, don't make it a cost issue. Its just tied up with a pretty 'free' bow, but there are plenty of costs.

**LivingAlmostLarge** · 07-15-2009, 05:41 AM

Have you lived there? My husband is Canadian. And has adored the system. So do my in-laws who live there currently. Where's Debbie from Vancouver?

I truly believe a lot of americans don't have a clue about socialized healthcare. They've never lived it or experienced it.

Those who have, who have come to the US have a very DIFFERENT perspective than those socialized care people who only know socialized medicine.

They haven't seen what happens when you are middle class in the US and your insurance doesn't cover treatment. Denies it because it's not the norm for treatment. Or you have maxed out your annual limit of care.

Come to the US and see how you fare. Try to live with the worry if you lose your job you lose your insurance. And if you lose insurance you might never be insured again if you have a preexisting condition.

You are uninsurable. There's a reason why the US is the only capitalistic medical system and why we spend more than everyone else and why people are calling for reform. It's certainly not because it's affordable and great.

**kyrie** · 07-15-2009, 05:52 AM

I have lived in both Canada and the US and have plenty of relatives still in Canada, all of which have horror stories.
Lots of people self-insure, which I did when I was unemployed for 9 months. It is do able. I had the option to go to my state (at the time, TN) and get their 'free' healthcare. One day spent in the clinic was enough for me to see it was NOT an acceptable option. And, Tennessee's system went bankrupt. No surprise there.
There are severe problems with healthcare almost everywhere, no doubt about it. I just know 'government' healthcare is NOT the answer.

**rockinray** · 07-18-2009, 06:39 AM

What the post isnt telling is that the reason the lady had to go to America for health coverage is because the Canadian health care system denied the surgery. And this is what some people think we need here?

**Joan.of.the.Arch** · 07-18-2009, 07:35 AM

Originally posted by rockinray View Post

What the post isnt telling is that the reason the lady had to go to America for health coverage is because the Canadian health care system denied the surgery. And this is what some people think we need here?

From the article I did not get that the surgery was denied. It sounded more to me that she had not yet had the diagnostic work done in Canada. She hurried the diagnostic work by going to a US clinic where diagnostics determined that she needed surgery (but does not say how urgent the need was). She was expecting waits of 4-6 months to see a neurologist and endocrinologist. I have little doubt that had the tumor been found already, her referrals to the endocrinologist, neurologist and whomever else necessary would have been more highly prioritized. Perhaps her symptoms did not point to a need for a next day, or next week appointment for further screening. The story about this woman's experience leaves questions unanswered. If I wanted to make a case against Canadian healthcare, I would not use this story as is. Maybe with more details.

Just because a person is having crushing headaches and vision problems does not mean that they have a brain tumor and need surgery. Other causes need to be looked for, too. And maybe the woman had known prior health problems that could cause those symptoms. Why refer a person with those symptoms to an endocrinologist for example? Could it be that she was a diabetic with poor blood sugar control which is well known for causing vision problems?...The Canadian referrals to get specialist care/screening does seem like a logical thing to me. It is fortunate that she hurried off somewhere for quicker diagnosis which turned up her need for surgery so that she could get it done promptly. The article does say that she took a "warning" from US doctors back to Canada and still could not get in to be seen quickly. But what did that "warning" say? ???"Dear Canadian Docs, You patient has a tumor we presume to be a slowly growing type and which should be removed sometime in the next four years. She also has some diabetic retinopathy which may be resolved in part by improved blood sugar control, but which may be cleared through laser surgery."??? That kind of message would have said that there is no hurry for surgery, but the article just does not give details, and we are left to assume the worst, if we are inclined to.

**markusk** · 07-18-2009, 12:07 PM

Thanks for the link. I found the last paragraph most ironic:

But in talking to doctors, government officials and even average Canadians, they concede their system is far from perfect, but there is one statistic they are quite proud of: All Canadians have health coverage. That's 33 million people, compared with the 47 million uninsured in the U.S.

There are more people uninsured in the US than the entire population of Canada (and they all have full coverage).

**GrimJack** · 07-26-2009, 11:44 PM

Do you understand that personal anecdotes are not a particularly good method for making decision that affect the nation's health. The problem with using anecdotal information is various:
people lie
systems have cracks that people can fall/slip through
is too open to manipulation.

Try to do a little research . I have not looked at the results of the search so you might find some better reasons to hate the medical system that every other 1st world country lives under.

**PennySaved** · 07-28-2009, 04:09 PM

We have quite a dichotomy in the US. People who have decent insurance and have a relationship with their doctor think they have great healthcare. People without insurance or who bounce from doc to doc feel they have lousy healthcare.

The key is helping people save money on healthcare, without comprimising clinicians' ability to deliver good care and have access to new procedures and techniques.

The American issue is more of a coverage issue than an entire healthcare issue. We have great medical care -- we just need more people to have access to it through better coverage.

**kyrie** · 07-29-2009, 04:35 AM

Spam. ^

**murphyc** · 07-30-2009, 03:52 AM

The whole concept that the government, ANY government, should foot most of the bill for our health care is ludicrous. The concept that anybody has a "right"to such a thing is also ludicrous. I feel like it won't be much longer before our American health care system will implode. I'm 55 and have been a tax payer since I was a teenager. I take relatively good care of myself but if I was told tomorrow I needed expensive chemo or something similar that I could not afford, I would not seek to have or expect somebody else to pay for it. I've come to the conclusion that when it's your time to go, it's your time, for pete sake. I'm a medical transcriber and cannot believe the amount of medications so many people are on, for example, or the procedures they undergo more than once, most of them just a stopgap so they can hobble on for a few more years at most. Or lie around in a nursing home for a few more years, who wants to??? What bull. Our American system is incredibly abused by folks who aren't truly sick, also, which is why things are in such a mess. And President Obama will not be able to fix the mess, either, that's also a hoot. Maybe we Americans need a taste of reality. One thing is sure, it can't go on forever like it has for so long now, and we will probably get what we deserve.

Reality check: Canada's government health care system