Canadian Defends Anti-Medicare Ad

Alta4ever · July 28, 2009

If you had a choice between taking what you can get, or getting the best what would you choose, especially if your life hangs in the balance?

Bryan · July 28, 2009

those that have space have terriblr bed side manner.

That's what I thought. :rolleyes:

Alta4ever · July 28, 2009

That's what I thought.

Fine give up your space with you r curent doctor and transfer to one of these.

Thats what i thought, most people want the best especially when it comes to their doctor, but it seems to me you seem to want medocracy. I spent two years with sevear chest pains, until someone came along who actually knew their job and took the time to find out whatwas actually wrong. Had you read my posts you would have read that part.

Jerry J. Fortin · July 28, 2009

I hope folks here understand that part of the problem is that GP's are not growing in number very rapidly. Most folks who become doctors tend to specialize and work in the big cities.

benny · July 28, 2009

I hope folks here understand that part of the problem is that GP's are not growing in number very rapidly. Most folks who become doctors tend to specialize and work in the big cities.

Do you really think Canadians will learn what is wrong about their healthcare system by listening to one American advertisement!?

Jerry J. Fortin · July 28, 2009

Do you really think Canadians will learn what is wrong about their healthcare system by listening to one American advertisement!?

No, not at all. Most Canadians are unaware of this nations problems let alone any other nations problems and certainly not what other nations see as our problems as they relate to their own.

benny · July 28, 2009

No, not at all. Most Canadians are unaware of this nations problems let alone any other nations problems and certainly not what other nations see as our problems as they relate to their own.

This American advertisement I'm quite sure was paid for and aired to desinform Americans about what is wrong with there own healthcare system.

Jerry J. Fortin · July 28, 2009

This American advertisement I'm quite sure was paid for and aired to desinform Americans about what is wrong with there own healthcare system.

I agree with that.

benny · July 28, 2009

I agree with that.

Now, how would you call a country that would revisit its healthcare system only because another country aired disinformation about the state of its own healthcare system!? I would call this country stupid.

Edited July 28, 2009 by benny

Jerry J. Fortin · July 28, 2009

Now, how would you call a country who would revisit its healthcare system only because another country aired disinformation about the state of its own healthcare system!? I would call this country stupid.

Canada never stops debating health care.

benny · July 28, 2009

Canada never stops debating health care.

We don't need bogus excuses!

Bryan · July 29, 2009

We don't need bogus excuses!

It's not ALL bogus though, any rational Canadian would still agree that there are things that some of the other universal systems do that we should look at. We'd never consider the US system under any circumstances, but France, Sweden, Norway, etc might be able to teach us a thing or two (just as we could show them a thing or two as well).

IMO, what Canadians need to do is disengage from the urge to argue with Americans over which system is better. We most certainly should set the record straight when they come up with some of the goofy made up stuff that are nowhere to be found here, but only in the vein of correcting mistakes/lies.

Smallc · July 29, 2009

I agree Bryan. I'm open to anything that will improve the system while still allowing equal and nearly unrestricted access to all. We can all learn from each other.

Edited July 29, 2009 by Smallc

bush_cheney2004 · July 29, 2009

....We'd never consider the US system under any circumstances, but France, Sweden, Norway, etc might be able to teach us a thing or two (just as we could show them a thing or two as well).

Except when it is needed to make up for lacking facilities and timely care....I guess because the USA is much closer than France, Norway, or Sweden.

Smallc · July 29, 2009

We're still not considering the US system, we're simply using your facilities.

bush_cheney2004 · July 29, 2009

We're still not considering the US system, we're simply using your facilities.

Such facilities are part of the US "system". A former Canadian deputy health minister was interviewed on NPR yesterday and he bluntly reported that Canada lacks the resources to provide access to modern medical technology in all cases, and probably always will. Canada depends on the US system to shore up inherent flaws in access and capacity in the "system".

Edited July 29, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

Smallc · July 29, 2009

Right....most of the time, people are sent to the US, and though they are using your facilities they're still under our system. The US doesn't really have a system....then again, neither does Canada....just an Act.

bush_cheney2004 · July 29, 2009

Right....most of the time, people are sent to the US, and though they are using your facilities they're still under our system. The US doesn't really have a system....then again, neither does Canada....just an Act.

Except for the ones who aren't...they have made other arrangements to also use the US "system". So there may be the false expectation for some that Canada will grow enough domestic capacity, when this is probably not the case.

If the USA adds up to "47 million" new insured consumers, Canadian provinces may be in for a pinch.

Edited July 29, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

lily · July 29, 2009

What you seem to miss is: whether we're treated in Canada or in the US (or elsewhere), we're treated. can you say the same for your fellow Americans?

Smallc · July 29, 2009

And lets see what type of waiting lists form as more people gain wider access to healthcare in the US.

Bryan · July 29, 2009

Except when it is needed to make up for lacking facilities and timely care....I guess because the USA is much closer than France, Norway, or Sweden.

When that claim that it was "needed" is framed in that way, how often is it true though? How many of them just turn out to be the professional liars like Shona Holmes?

bush_cheney2004 · July 29, 2009

When that claim that it was "needed" is framed in that way, how often is it true though? How many of them just turn out to be the professional liars like Shona Holmes?

You can set Shona's saga aside....utilization of US capacity by the provinces is real and part of their planning process.

Smallc · July 29, 2009

It's very rarely a part of my provinces planning. Only when very exceptional procedures are needed do we send people to the US.

bush_cheney2004 · July 29, 2009

It's very rarely a part of my provinces planning. Only when very exceptional procedures are needed do we send people to the US.

I propose that it is far more than that, and at least a formal part of contingency planning and hedge for peak utilization. I don't know for a fact, but I am betting that contracts exist for services and rates, just like any other American underwriter. We have anecdotal evidence in this forum that there actually exists the expectation that US facilities are always an option if one asks and has urgent needs.

punked · July 29, 2009

Know what I find funny BC is talking like no American ever comes up here for their medical needs. My uncle was in a MS drug trail and there was more Americans in the trail then Canadians.