Liberals talk Gutting health care

[Smallc]

Could care less if he is a doctor, could care less what his old party was. He is a Liberal until they tell him he isn't so I assume he speaks for the Liberal party until they say otherwise.

Like I've told you before, you're the Democrat/New Democrat version of Shady. If you think that every single member of every party speaks for that party, you're very shallow and mistaken in your political view.

[punked]

Like I've told you before, you're the Democrat/New Democrat version of Shady. If you think that every single member of every party speaks for that party, you're very shallow and mistaken in your political view.

Then maybe the Liberals should have a Party position on the subject, or a platform, or something can tell what they stand for. Right now I know nothing so when the only thing I hear from Liberals is from its members is privatize, I can rightfully assume that is what they believe.

You are not allowed to as a party say nothing and hope someone else wont define you. Keith is now defining the Liberal party on health care, until I hear otherwise.

[Smallc]

Then maybe the Liberals should have a Party position on the subject, or a platform, or something can tell what they stand for. Right now I know nothing so when the only thing I hear from Liberals is from its members is privatize, I can rightfully assume that is what they believe.

You can do that, because you're a party hack:

http://www.liberal.ca/issues/health-home-care/

[punked]

You can do that, because you're a party hack:

http://www.liberal.ca/issues/health-home-care/

Again that is NOT A POSITION, the Liberals are in favor of publicly funded health care DOES NOT SPEAK to what Martin is talking about. Maybe read what you post next time. That is not a position on a privatized system. Sorry try again.

No party in Canada is against public funding for health care you should have just linked me to a page that said "The Liberals would like be elected in Canada."

[Smallc]

Again that is NOT A POSITION, the Liberals are in favor of publicly funded health care DOES NOT SPEAK to what Martin is talking about.

Liberals are committed to our public health care system and will work to enhance its quality and financial sustainability.

The above speaks directly to it.

[Evening Star]

I'm sure they do, but even Canadians so enthralled with Princess Margaret hospital know that there still is something better. And so does the rest of the deep pocketed or insured world, like PM Chretien, Belinda Stronach, Mr. Williams, etc. Hell, even "average" Canadian Janes and Joes are sent "south" when their province comes up short on facilities and long on waits.

Actually, I'm not 100% convinced of this. My experiences with US health care did not leave me especially impressed and it will take more than sheer assertions to change my mind.

From Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada#Cross-border_health_care :

A study by Barer, et al., indicates that the majority of Canadians who seek health care the U.S. are already there for other reasons, including business travel or vacations. A smaller proportion seek care in the U.S. for reasons of confidentiality, including abortions, mental illness, substance abuse, and other problems that they may not wish to divulge to their local physician, family, or employer.

* Canadians offered free care in the US paid by the Canadian government have sometimes declined it. In 1990 the British Columbia Medical Association ran radio ads asking, "What's the longest you'd wait in line at a bank before getting really annoyed? Five minutes? Ten minutes? What if you needed a heart operation?" Following this, the government responded, as summarized by Robin Hutchinson, senior medical consultant for the health ministry's heart program. Despite the medically questionable nature of heart bypass for milder cases of chest pain and follow-up studies showing heart bypass recipients were only 25-40% more likely to be relieved of chest pain than people who stay on heart medicine, the "public outcry" following the ads led the government to take action:

"'We did a deal with the University of Washington at Seattle' said Hutchinton..to take 50 bypass cases at $18,000 per head, almost $3,000 higher than the cost in Vancouver, with all the money [paid by] the province..In theory, the Seattle operations promised to take the heat off the Ministry of Health until a fourth heart surgery unit opened in the Vancouver suburb of New Westminster. If the first batch of Seattle bypasses went smoothly..then the government planned to buy three or four more 50-head blocks. But for weeks after announcing the plan, health administrators had to admit they were stumped. 'As of now..we've have nine people sign up. The opposition party, the press, everybody's making a big stink about our waiting lists. And we've got [only] nine people signed up! The surgeons ask their patients and they say, "I'd rather wait," We thought we could get maybe two hundred and fifty done down in Seattle..but if nobody wants to go to Seattle, we're stuck,'".[72]

* In a Canadian National Population Health Survey of 17,276 Canadian residents, it was reported that only 0.5% sought medical care in the US in the previous year. Of these, less than a quarter had traveled to the U.S. expressly to get that care.[73]

* A 2002 study by Katz, Cardiff, et al., reported the number of Canadians using U.S. services to be "barely detectible relative to the use of care by Canadians at home" and that the results "do not support the widespread perception that Canadian residents seek care extensively in the United States."[74]

I'm not saying our system is perfect by any means and I'm willing to believe that there may be better systems in the world.

But, actually, punked's belief that we can maintain our system with higher taxes seems quite sensible to me. Why is this so wrong?

[scribblet]

The "solution" is to increase immigration.

Only to those who have the skills that Canada needs.

[Evening Star]

It does seem though that things could be helped along by e.g. speeding up the accreditation of doctors from countries such as India.

[wyly]

It does seem though that things could be helped along by e.g. speeding up the accreditation of doctors from countries such as India.

not as simple as it seems, just because someone is a MD in another country that does not make them qualified to be a MD here, standards of education in other countries vary widely from university to another within the same country...then there is the problem of language, the MD must be absolutely fluent in written and spoken english, a misunderstanding in communication with the patient, orders given to a nurse or in prescription for drugs can be fatal, some MD's never master our language so they're doomed...

our problems are mostly demographic, we have a lot of old people and more coming as the boomers go into retirement, and many of our MD's are boomers...so we need more long term beds, more tax dollars....we need more front line MD's/family physicians, again more tax dollars for higher wages otherwise they stay in school and become specialists...more training facilities in order to turn out more MD's and Nurses, more taxes again...more walk-in clinics to take the pressure off over worked ER's...

[Evening Star]

How many people with a medical education from India have major problems with the English language? Seriously, I'd be interested in numbers on that. What are the differences in basic medical training? Not saying they don't exist, just curious how serious they are and how fairly they are represented in the current requirements wrt accreditation.

[wyly]

How many people with a medical education from India have major problems with the English language? Seriously, I'd be interested in numbers on that. What are the differences in basic medical training? Not saying they don't exist, just curious how serious they are and how fairly they are represented in the current requirements wrt accreditation.

I haven't a clue what the standards are in each country or each university we have Medical experts to determine that and they're not about to let anyone begin a practice here if they believe they're inadequate they must meet our standards not their homelands...English isn't India's first language why would you assume they're all fluent I've encountered professionals from India whose fluency was excellent and others who I could barely understand...there's a myth in Canada that there are all sorts of qualified MD's driving taxi's here, if they're driving a cab it's because they aren't qualified...

[Shady]

Actually, I'm not 100% convinced of this. My experiences with US health care did not leave me especially impressed and it will take more than sheer assertions to change my mind.

It's not a choice between our current system, and the American system. That's a false choice. We can look at France or Germany, or small portions of a private system like in America. While still keeping the vast majority of our public system.

[guyser]

...there's a myth in Canada that there are all sorts of qualified MD's driving taxi's here, if they're driving a cab it's because they aren't qualified...

No it isnt a myth. Perhaps there are not as many as some would like us to believe, but they are out there.

Look no further than the CMA as the culprits. Requirements for already established Docs to come into this country from overseas are ridiculous.

Test test and re-test, fast track the ones who show the most promise and voila...part of the problem solved. Six months is a do able time restraint.

[Evening Star]

It's not a choice between our current system, and the American system. That's a false choice. We can look at France or Germany, or small portions of a private system like in America. While still keeping the vast majority of our public system.

Yeah, that comment was specifically in response to bush_cheney2004's comments about the US system.

[wyly]

No it isnt a myth. Perhaps there are not as many as some would like us to believe, but they are out there.

Look no further than the CMA as the culprits. Requirements for already established Docs to come into this country from overseas are ridiculous.

Test test and re-test, fast track the ones who show the most promise and voila...part of the problem solved. Six months is a do able time restraint.

and they're not qualified, go talk to the MD's who know what's going on and not radio talk shows or the guys down at Tim's...

6 months re-testing is that adequate for a profession that takes 6-8yrs training more if specialized? are you going to volunteer to be their patient with a potential life threatening condition?

[guyser]

and they're not qualified, go talk to the MD's who know what's going on and not radio talk shows or the guys down at Tim's...

Hold the cream will ya, and add a donut to my order. Nice outfit, does Tims pay for it?

6 months re-testing is that adequate for a profession that takes 6-8yrs training more if specialized? are you going to volunteer to be their patient with a potential life threatening condition?

Oh lordy , dont be a daft. It would take mere hours to figure out if they are on the up and up. The comes some intense training alongside a Dr in an hospital, then a sign off by training doc for further evaluation.

Tell me. If a Dr moved to BC from Nfld, do they get sent back to school for 8 yrs?

Ahh....the emotion card. So thoughtful. Of course it doesnt take into account the myriad F-ups born and taught right here in Canada, maybe even the Doc you use now. But no....its only those Docs from outside our country who suck.

Edited September 17, 2010 by guyser

[wyly]

Tell me. If a Dr moved to BC from Nfld, do they get sent back to school for 8 yrs?

hmmm I have a number of MD friends, one went from Sask to NFLD, began immediately, another went from Sask to Manitoba and began immediately, another in Alberta was offered a position in BC to start immediately...

Oh lordy , dont be a daft. It would take mere hours to figure out if they are on the up and up. The comes some intense training alongside a Dr in an hospital, then a sign off by training doc for further evaluation.

oh ya there is so little to cover in testing a MD's medical knowledge it can be done in an afternoon

Ahh....the emotion card. So thoughtful. Of course it doesnt take into account the myriad F-ups born and taught right here in Canada, maybe even the Doc you use now. But no....its only those Docs from outside our country who suck.

ya there are Fuck ups here does that mean we need to add more from outside just because you want to take their word for it they're qualified...our MD training is 2nd to none but no system will reduce to zero those who screw up...

it takes time to be certified and it doesn't contribute to our MD shortage as qualified MD's are being accepted, if it takes 4 years(random number) to be certified those who applied 4 yrs ago start working now, those who applied 3 years ago start next year, so fast tracking immigrant MD's will solve nothing but it will get someone killed...

Edited September 17, 2010 by wyly

[Topaz]

How many people with a medical education from India have major problems with the English language? Seriously, I'd be interested in numbers on that. What are the differences in basic medical training? Not saying they don't exist, just curious how serious they are and how fairly they are represented in the current requirements wrt accreditation.

People from that area have a thick accent when talking English, at times its hard to understand them and by asking them to repeat what they said, makes it kinda embarrassing for them.

[Evening Star]

People from that area have a thick accent when talking English, at times its hard to understand them and by asking them to repeat what they said, makes it kinda embarrassing for them.

Not exactly the same as making a life-threatening error on a prescription? (Also, many educated Indians speak English without a difficult accent, although I suppose that's in the ear of the beholder. Should we also slow the accreditation process or require accent coaches for doctors from e.g. Scotland or New Zealand or West Virginia?)

[Evening Star]

I'll be honest, though, that I don't know exactly what is involved with the accreditation process for foreign-trained doctors and am mostly going by things I've heard from others.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm not saying our system is perfect by any means and I'm willing to believe that there may be better systems in the world.

But, actually, punked's belief that we can maintain our system with higher taxes seems quite sensible to me. Why is this so wrong?

It's wrong because the system isn't set up with any kind of feedback to ensure that it's run properly. The system relies on politicians to manage the system properly, and politicians are notorious for focusing on short-term goals, and popular issues only.

The problem, though, is that people only accept the situation and don't demand better. The problem is with the people.

[Evening Star]

Incorporating a feedback mechanism doesn't have to mean a privatized option though.

Maybe people are relatively satisfied and complacent because, like me, they think the system is mostly working very well?

[bush_cheney2004]

Yeah, that comment was specifically in response to bush_cheney2004's comments about the US system.

My comment is more than just an assertion....several Canadian provinces have standing contracts with US providers to make up for shortfalls in facilities, procedures, and wait times. The United States' excess (for profit) capacity is part of Canada's health care system.

[wyly]

Not exactly the same as making a life-threatening error on a prescription? (Also, many educated Indians speak English without a difficult accent, although I suppose that's in the ear of the beholder. Should we also slow the accreditation process or require accent coaches for doctors from e.g. Scotland or New Zealand or West Virginia?)

each case is different, some are not a problem and some are... fluency in language is more than just an accent...

[bjre]

http://www.chrgonline.com/news_detail.asp?ID=142998

Health care spending to reach $192 billion this year

Growth slows to lowest rate since 1997; share of spending on seniors stable

Ottawa, October 29, 2010 - Total spending on health care in Canada is expected to reach $191.6 billion this year, growing an estimated $9.5 billion, or 5.2%, since 2009, according to new figures released by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). This represents an increase of $216 per Canadian, bringing total health expenditure per capita to an estimated $5,614. After removing the effects of inflation and population growth, health care spending per person is expected to increase by 1.4% in 2010, the lowest annual growth rate seen in 13 years.

When examined as a share of Canada's overall economy, health care spending is expected to reach 11.7% of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2010, a decline from the estimated share of 11.9% in 2009, but still higher than it was in 2008, at 10.7%. The figures released today (Oct. 28) are from CIHI's annual report, National Health Expenditure Trends, 1975 to 2010, Canada's most up-to-date and comprehensive source of information tracking how dollars are spent on health care in this country.

That means that 28k of my tax dollars was taken by health industry. Because I almost have not use it (except for the H1N1 flu shot that even if I did not use it, it will go to somewhere in Africa as donation when it left no one use it).

I guess most of the 28k were wasted by corruption in the bureaucracy because of no competition exist in Canadian health system.

Edited October 30, 2010 by bjre