Canadian Defends Anti-Medicare Ad

M.Dancer · July 23, 2009

The UN used to rank....but the task was demanding

Rank Country

1 France

2 Italy

3 San Marino

4 Andorra

5 Malta

6 Singapore

7 Spain

8 Oman

9 Austria

10 Japan

11 Norway

12 Portugal

13 Monaco

14 Greece

15 Iceland

16 Luxembourg

17 Netherlands

18 United Kingdom

19 Ireland

20 Switzerland

21 Belgium

22 Colombia

23 Sweden

24 Cyprus

25 Germany

26 Saudi Arabia

27 United Arab Emirates

28 Israel

29 Morocco

30 Canada

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

Edited July 23, 2009 by M.Dancer

Radsickle · July 23, 2009

did you just link an actual WHO ranking or Thedora's propaganda? Follow your links.

Here's something a bit more current, actually from the World Health Organization:

Providing
coverage to all is a financial challenge, but most systems now rely on

out-of-pocket payments which is the least fair and effective method.

WHO recommends financial pooling and pre-payment, such as insurance

schemes. Brazil began working towards universal coverage in 1988 and

now reaches 70% of its population.

http://www.who.int/whr/2008/summary.pdf

Edited July 23, 2009 by Radsickle

Smallc · July 23, 2009

That is the UN ranking. That said, I would say that our system in most provinces has improved since the rating was last done, and I would wager money that we rank higher than that now.

M.Dancer · July 23, 2009

did you just link an actual WHO ranking or Thedora's propaganda?

That's the WHO ranking. You can find it elsewhere if you are inclined. I have no idea who theodora is, aside from an empress of rome.

M.Dancer · July 23, 2009

Same WHo, different methodology.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/nov...dicineandhealth

Radsickle · July 23, 2009

Same WHo, different methodology.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/nov...dicineandhealth

oh? From your link, the following revised list:

The new rankings
Sweden

Norway

Australia

Canada

France

Germany

Spain

Finland

Italy

Denmark

Seems we're better than France a few years later...And England plummetted in that study because they tried the two-tiered approach.

Edited July 23, 2009 by Radsickle

M.Dancer · July 23, 2009

oh? From your link, the following revised list:
Seems we're better than France a few years later...And England plummetted in that study because they tried the two-tiered approach.

You are making a gross assumption not supported by the article.

Radsickle · July 23, 2009

You are making a gross assumption not supported by the article.

Canada's fourth in that new list. France is fifth... do the math.

As for England, I know a few people there and they don't like the two-tier.

July 23, 2009

That's from 2003 any chance of a 2008/2009 study?

Smallc · July 23, 2009

Well, being that the Wait Time Alliance and CIHI both say that waits have been reduced by large amounts since 2003, it's a safe assumption that we're doing better.

Radsickle · July 23, 2009

That is the UN ranking.

correction, Baboon calls it the UN Ranking but his link shows it to be the WHO ranking... and when you click on the `WHO ranking' list, you get another page on photius.com's site, which is a `division of theodora', which is obviously a corporation and not a respectable Non-Governmental-Organization. The whole website is suspect and should never be used as a link to a respectable organization.

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2009

Well, being that the Wait Time Alliance and CIHI both say that waits have been reduced by large amounts since 2003, it's a safe assumption that we're doing better.

Oh yea...much better...like 23rd out of 32...

For the second time in less than two weeks, the Canadian public health care system has flunked an international comparison test.

"Canada is doing quite poorly compared to most European nations," said Johan Hjertqvist of the Health Consumer Powerhouse. HCP is a research organization headquartered in Belgium, and it ranks the Canadian health care system 23rd among 32 nations surveyed for quality, access, and innovation.

In particular, wait times to see a doctor and receive treatment drag the Canadian ranking toward the bottom.

"Why should you have to wait three months, or 15 months for treatment when you evidently -- if you look into conditions in Germany or France or the Netherlands -- can have it in a couple of weeks with the same kind of quality?" asked Hjertqvist.

The survey also finds that while Canada is one of the highest per capita spenders on health care, we don't get much for our money. On the so-called "bang for the buck scale," that measured health care results for the number of dollars spent, Canada ranks dead last among the 32 nations.

http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/canada/art...ational-ranking

Edited July 23, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

Jerry J. Fortin · July 23, 2009

Oh yea...much better...like 23rd out of 32...

For the second time in less than two weeks, the Canadian public health care system has flunked an international comparison test.

"Canada is doing quite poorly compared to most European nations," said Johan Hjertqvist of the Health Consumer Powerhouse. HCP is a research organization headquartered in Belgium, and it ranks the Canadian health care system 23rd among 32 nations surveyed for quality, access, and innovation.

In particular, wait times to see a doctor and receive treatment drag the Canadian ranking toward the bottom.

"Why should you have to wait three months, or 15 months for treatment when you evidently -- if you look into conditions in Germany or France or the Netherlands -- can have it in a couple of weeks with the same kind of quality?" asked Hjertqvist.

The survey also finds that while Canada is one of the highest per capita spenders on health care, we don't get much for our money. On the so-called "bang for the buck scale," that measured health care results for the number of dollars spent, Canada ranks dead last among the 32 nations.

Ouch!!

http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/canada/art...ational-ranking

Smallc · July 23, 2009

Where do you wait 15 months for something in Canada anymore? Objectively, the independent CIHI says that waits have dropped and by a great deal. There are still problems no doubt, but some would make it out to be far worse than it is.

Smallc · July 23, 2009

,

Edited July 23, 2009 by Smallc

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2009

Where do you wait 15 months for something in Canada anymore? Objectively, the independent CIHI says that waits have dropped and by a great deal. There are still problems no doubt, but some would make it out to be far worse than it is.

Not hard to find lengthy waits as published by provinces:

http://canadaonline.about.com/od/healthcar...e_in_Canada.htm

http://canadaonline.about.com/gi/dynamic/o...%2FIndex-e.aspx

Edited July 23, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

Radsickle · July 23, 2009

Now that's a link!

The analysis was co-sponsored by the Frontier Centre of Public Policy, which says the Canadian system is in some respects held hostage by vested interests, such as public sector unions.

I would say that the Canadian system is held hostage by pharmaceutical companies `vested interests', not unions. Canucks are very gullible when it comes to whatever pill will `cure' your ill. It's a poor approach to healthcare; to allow the snake-oil salesmen such a stranglehold. But who can compete with lobbyists and commercials on American Networks?

We'd get more `bang for the buck' if we supported more of the `alternative' approaches.

Edited July 23, 2009 by Radsickle

Smallc · July 23, 2009

Most of those waits seem to be trending in one direction. Oh, and BC, what that study really showed is that the Canadian system needs to pay for more things and be somewhat faster....but it doesn't seem to affect outcomes much if at all.

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2009

Now that's a link!

Happy to rain on your fantasy.

I would say that the Canadian system is held hostage by pharmaceutical companies `vested interests', not unions. Canucks are very gullible when it comes to whatever pill will `cure' your ill. It's a poor approach to healthcare, to allow the snake-oil salesmen such a stranglehold. But who can compete with lobbyists and commercials on American Networks?

If you can't compete, you lose. Complain to the CRTC.

We'd get more `bang for the buck' if we supported more of the `alternative' approaches.

Accupuncture?

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2009

Most of those waits seem to be trending in one direction. Oh, and BC, what that study really showed is that the Canadian system needs to pay for more things and be somewhat faster....but it doesn't seem to affect outcomes much if at all.

No need to tap dance for me....I didn't write the report. Some of those provincial wait times are scary, no matter how you spin the sunshine.

I mean..c'mon...a group actually called "The Wait Time Alliance"...priceless!

Edited July 23, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

Smallc · July 23, 2009

BC, you aren't raining on anyone parade, you're simply being as irrelevant as usual. There's almost no debate in Canada when it comes to health care. We all agree that it needs improvement and that it needs to stay accessible. There seems to be substantial debate in the US. Perhaps you should focus your efforts there.

Smallc · July 23, 2009

Some of those provincial wait times are scary, no matter how you spin the sunshine.

Still doesn't seem to affect outcomes. If you need it you get it. Wait times are an average and nothing more. I don't need to spin. You have nothing of substance to offer, just criticism...and not the constructive kind.

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2009

BC, you aren't raining on anyone parade, you're simply being as irrelevant as usual. There's almost no debate in Canada when it comes to health care. We all agree that it needs improvement and that it needs to stay accessible. There seems to be substantial debate in the US. Perhaps you should focus your efforts there.

Spin...spin.....spin.....I like your positive outlook. So why does this OP exist?

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2009

Still doesn't seem to affect outcomes. If you need it you get it. Wait times are an average and nothing more. I don't need to spin. You have nothing of substance to offer, just criticism...and not the constructive kind.

The masses screamed for links....I found one...fresher than your rotten fish.

scorpio · July 23, 2009

I call complete bullshit on that. You cannot get a CAT scan or MRI the next day. Sorry. Actually you can, if you're a cat or dog, but that's it.

I don't care if you believe or not, but don't call me a liar. It happened. I saw an opthamalogist, was admitted that day to the Calgary General and had a CAT scan the next day.