US dead last in health care

[Guest American Woman]

I compared neo ICU's to a wheelbarrow?

It was an analogy, And it fits. No one is relying on anyone excpet CDN' s rely on CDN healthcare.

No, it doesn't fit. At all.

CDN's rely on CDN which relies on the U.S. health care system when lacking facilities/services.

Economic costs suggest it isnt prudent, When status quo demands it.....poof...there it is. We do build hospitals in burgeoning suburbs and cities because the demand is there.

So pray tell, why are patients sent to Detroit rather than Windsor, or Seattle or Spokane rather than Vancouver?

But yes. Economic costs do suggest it isn't prudent. Just as I've been saying all along. It's cheaper to send patients to the U.S. - rather than be self reliant.

If, in reality, there would be no drain on Canada's budget to provide enough facilities/services in Canada, and the government is simply choosing to inconvenience Canadians by sending them to another country for services that could just as easily be provided in Canada, then I think there's something seriously wrong with your government's mindset.

I recall a news article about a woman in labor in Canada who had to be rushed by ambulance to the U.S.; the mother felt so isolated - and that is not an isolated case. But hey, it's no different than borrowing your neighbor's wheelbarrow, right?

Do we rely on US hospitals to take all of those new suburbians that may not have a hospital close by? No...we build one.

So why would it be closer/easier to send patients from the outlying areas where there are no facilities/services because it would be cost prohibitive to the U.S. than to somewhere else in Canada?

But yes, in contradiction to your claim above that "no one is relying on anyone," Canada does "rely on US hospitals" - your words. Just as I've been saying.

It is self sufficient.

"Relies on US hospitals" and "it is self sufficient" is a contradiction. If you can't see that, well.... then I have to wonder why.

Why does the US population that travels outside the US , including Canada, rely on the worlds hospitals to make them better?

The simple answer is they dont.

No, they don't - they aren't sent there by our government because of lack of facilities/services. They may choose to go there for other reasons, but it's not for lack of facilities/services.

[bush_cheney2004]

....No, they don't - they aren't sent there by our government because of lack of facilities/services. They may choose to go there for other reasons, but it's not for lack of facilities/services.

This is key....provincial GOVERNMENTS have entered into standing contracts with private American health care providers to make up for purposeful, rationed shortfalls in domestic facilities and staff.

Edited January 12, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

You asked this Q three times now, I ignored it as it is immaterial to the discussion.

How is it immaterial to the discussion? First Nations people are an entire "subset" of people who have one of the lowest life expectancies in the developed world - yet they have access to national health care. Obviously public health care doesn't guarantee good health or longevity; and obviously there are sometimes other factors at play regarding things like life expectancy than universal health care. In other words, statistics in and of themselves mean very little. Just as I said.

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

But here are some statistics anyway, since that seems to be the main attraction in this thread:

Edited January 12, 2013 by American Woman

[Guest American Woman]

This is key....provincial GOVERMENTS have entered into standing contracts with private American health care providers to make up for purposeful, rationed shortfalls in domestic facilities and staff.

Exactly. There's nothing to refute there - it's a fact.

[guyser]

No, it doesn't fit. At all CDN's rely on CDN which relies on the U.S. health care system when lacking facilities/services..

Now you are bing obstinate for obstinate sake.

The analogy fits. Tell me why it doesnt instead of just 'it doesnt"

So pray tell, why are patients sent to Detroit rather than Windsor, or Seattle or Spokane rather than Vancouver?

Availability, geographic closeness,urgency, economics.....

But yes. Economic costs do suggest it isn't prudent. Just as I've been saying all along. It's cheaper to send patients to the U.S. - rather than be self reliant.

We are self reliant.

Canada Prov Health Act pays for it. We dont get it free ergo no reliance. You guys are generous , not dumb.

If, in reality, there would be no drain on Canada's budget to provide enough facilities/services in Canada, and the government is simply choosing to inconvenience Canadians by sending them to another country for services that could just as easily be provided in Canada, then I think there's something seriously wrong with your government's mindset.

Ok, you can think that.

I recall a news article about a woman in labor in Canada who had to be rushed by ambulance to the U.S.; the mother felt so isolated - and that is not an isolated case. But hey, it's no different than borrowing your neighbor's wheelbarrow, right?

Really?

Oh FFS, stop with the drama.

A woman having a baby in Chicago even though she lives in Peoria might feel isolated. Gosh, ya think? Shes away from her surroundings.

Maybe we can give her a wheelbarrow.

What part of analogy is so hard to understand, unless you want not to understand because you feel slighted.

So why would it be closer/easier to send patients from the outlying areas where there are no facilities/services because it would be cost prohibitive to the U.S. than to somewhere else in Canada?

.

"Relies on US hospitals" and "it is self sufficient" is a contradiction. If you can't see that, well.... then I have to wonder why.

We arent reliant. We pay for every procedure that si performed.

Thats not reliant,. but convolute it some way to show that it does will be along with your next post.

No, they don't - they aren't sent there by our government because of lack of facilities/services. They may choose to go there for other reasons, but it's not for lack of facilities/services.

Ok , they go there because the procedure isnt available in the US, or the cost might be too prohibitive.

But why are US citizens relying on the worlds hospitals to provide service? I mean ...why?

Relying on the worlds largesse no less. Oh the horrors.

Ok we rely on the US, the US relys ( on a much grander scale by a multiple of almost 20 ) on the rest of the world for the charity of healthcare,

Tsk tsk.

[bush_cheney2004]

Economics and banking regs could have been curtailed as we did. We survived pretty well this recession.

...and the U.S. would have lacked capital and needed to beg for foreign investment just like Canada does to this day. Canada "survived" by not having much at risk to begin with.

The point is, with this frame of mind "sure as hell ain't what's found in Canada' it will remain the same.

Actually, the U.S. does have a single payer health care insurance system that dwarfs anything found in Canada (see Medicare). It also has separate veterans, Medicaid, and state level programs as well. It has public and private solutions that are not strangled by CHA edicts forbidding creative insurance products for designated procedures. Canadians fed up with that brand of wait time BS just go elsewhere for care, and not just to the United States.

[guyser]

How is it immaterial to the discussion?

Already answered.

Why are American Indians and Alaskans subject to almost three times the TB rate?

Why 60% more deaths at birth for Am Indians?

I see that was ignored by you.

The fact is you know the answer and thought it would be cute to think no one would turn it around.

How s this sound.....in North America dont be born either American Indian/Alaskan or First Nation. Your healthcare will suck for the reason in a post a few up from this.

Sounds good?

[guyser]

Actually, the U.S. does have a single payer health care insurance system that dwarfs anything found in Canada (see Medicare). It also has separate veterans, Medicaid, and state level programs as well. It has public and private solutions that are not strangled by CHA edicts forbidding creative insurance products for designated procedures. Canadians fed up with that brand of wait time BS just go elsewhere for care, and not just to the United States.

That has nothing to do with.....The point is, with this frame of mind "sure as hell ain't what's found in Canada' it will remain the same.

The intent was to say that if one buries the head in the sand, nothing changes.,

[bush_cheney2004]

That has nothing to do with.....The point is, with this frame of mind "sure as hell ain't what's found in Canada' it will remain the same.

The intent was to say that if one buries the head in the sand, nothing changes.,

OK...I will have to hit you over the head with it.....the U.S. has developed multiple solutions for federal, state, and local health care needs, many in place long before Canada's Health Act (1984). Other nations have far better public-private solutions than what we see in Canada, which is why there is no need to look at what currently exists there. France is touted as one of the best examples to study...NOT CANADA.

[Bryan]

France is touted as one of the best examples to study...NOT CANADA.

That's true, we are not the best, and we freely admit it. We are, however, better than you.

Then again, so is Cuba.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Bryan

[MiddleClassCentrist]

2011 statistics rank the U.S. at #1 in a few categories.....Canada ranks #1 in zero categories.

Didn't a member here say that Canadians are still wiping poop on fecal occult test cards for colon cancer screening, while Americans are routinely getting colonoscopies with concurrent polyp removal ?

You have to look at the whole of the system.

Not nit pick Mr. 38th place

[Guest American Woman]

Already answered.

Why are American Indians and Alaskans subject to almost three times the TB rate?

Why 60% more deaths at birth for Am Indians?

I see that was ignored by you.

It wasn't ignored by me at all. I clearly said: Obviously public health care doesn't guarantee good health or longevity; and obviously there are sometimes other factors at play regarding things like life expectancy than universal health care. I will now add, or lack thereof. How good a nation's health care system is isn't that simplistic.

So, I did not ignore what you said - and what I said regarding First Nations people most definitely was not immaterial. It's very relevant to the discussion. One cannot base how good a nation's health care is by simple statistics.

The fact is you know the answer and thought it would be cute to think no one would turn it around.

Really? Cute? I thought it would be cute? Now you're joining the ranks of those who tell me what I know and what I think - and insult me? Seriously. Who are you and where's the guyser I thought I knew? This is so unexpected from you.

How s this sound.....in North America dont be born either American Indian/Alaskan or First Nation. Your healthcare will suck for the reason in a post a few up from this.

Sounds good?

It sounds as ridiculous as only looking at statistics to make the kind of judgments that have been made in this thread - for the reasons I've stated, for starters.

That's true, we are not the best, and we freely admit it. We are, however, better than you.

Then again, so is Cuba.

Really? And you know that - how?

Edited January 12, 2013 by American Woman

[Moonlight Graham]

The title of this thread is inaccurate, the OP article ranks the health of countries, not the health care systems. There could be other reasons why Americans have such poor health other than their health care system (which is likely still a factor).

There could be social/cultural reasons, like higher gun ownership & more violent society overall, or a higher consumerism/advertising culture leading to buying more junk food/fast food. The US has the 3rd largest population in the world, so environmental and urban population density reasons may factor as well.

[Bryan]

Really? And you know that - how?

To be fair, on many markers, Cuba has better care than we do to. They have the lowest infant mortality rate in the western hemisphere, the second most doctors per capita in the world too.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/health/2013-01/04/c_132079776.htm

http://www.socialmedicine.org/2012/07/30/about/cuba-leads-the-world-in-lowest-patient-per-doctor-ratio-how-do-they-do-it/

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_phy_per_1000_peo-physicians-per-1-000-people

I've also been to Cuba several times, and I've got freinds who live there. I'm familiar with how their system works, and it's essentially similar to Canada's, except that it costs a lot less, and they have more doctors than we do.

[dre]

[Guest American Woman]

To be fair, on many markers, Cuba has better care than we do to.

This is refreshing, but I'm not sure it's true, all things considered.

They have the lowest infant mortality rate in the western hemisphere, the second most doctors per capita in the world too.

http://news.xinhuane...c_132079776.htm

http://www.socialmed...-do-they-do-it/

http://www.nationmas...er-1-000-people

I've also been to Cuba several times, and I've got freinds who live there. I'm familiar with how their system works, and it's essentially similar to Canada's, except that it costs a lot less, and they have more doctors than we do.

Your links don't say that Cuba's health care is better than the U.S.'s - or Canada's, since you brought Canada into it

Doctors per capita doesn't automatically mean better care - nor does it mean that Cubans living in rural, more remote areas have access to those doctors; and infant mortality of "live births" doesn't automatically mean better care, either. The U.S. has a greater percentage of "preterm" births than a lot of other nations, Cuba included, which accounts for our higher infant mortality rate. Why is that? Smoking ( a life choice) seems to play a big part, which has nothing to do with our health care.

I keep repeating it because it's true: there are factors other than health care at play here. I used the example of First Nations people in Canada - who have access to the same health care as the general population - yet have one of the lowest life expectancy rates in the developed world. I also brought up the "healthy immigrant effect" factor. I also brought up the Canadian government's reliance on U.S. facilities/services rather than spending the money to ensure that Canada has the facilities needed - while the U.S. government has no such 'safety net.' I've never heard of the U.S. government sending Americans to Canada or Mexico due to lack of facilities/services in the U.S. - and I'm not even criticizing Canada for that, but it would be refreshing to see a Canadian admit that 'yes, we have been fortunate to have been able to save lives because of facilities in the U.S., and yes, I can see where it would require a higher percentage of GDP spending, since these things don't come free' Also, I've never heard of any high profile Americans going outside the U.S for their health care needs - as high profile Canadians have chosen the U.S. over Canada. One last point - longer wait times mean more time off of work in some instances, yet that cost to the individual is never factored into these 'studies.'

A discussion consists of actual discussion, which is why I've raised these points - yet the only "discussion" some here seem to want is the response that Canada rocks and the U.S. sucks.

The opening post says that to improve our health care, we should adopt Canada's single payer system, yet I've never seen any studies or comparisons of Canada vs. people in the U.S. who are insured. Who has the better health outcome in that regard? People have also accused Americans of not wanting to pay taxes to cover health care - as they point out that "the U.S. spends a much greater proportion of it's GDP on health care. Who do they think is paying for that? - obviously Americans are willing to pay taxes for health care.

Americans want to get it right - or at least as right as possible. They don't want to give up the good. And why should we? We, as a nation, have been discussing what would work for some time now. It's going to take awhile - we have a diverse population of 310+ million people. If it takes us longer to come up with an acceptable solution than it does a country with the population of one of our states - less than one of our cities, in some instances - it's understandable. We see some health models that work, some that don't work so well. We see some that have worked for awhile getting low on funds - what's going to happen then?

Is it better to have care paid for - or to have to pay the price, but have the services available? That's an important question. This isn't an easy issue - and it certainly is not the simple 'adopt Canada's single payer plan' that the opening post suggests.

Edited January 12, 2013 by American Woman

[cybercoma]

Really? If it's so "minor," why wouldn't Canada provide the facilities/services?

You seem to be having trouble understanding that the United States is dead last. Are they supplementing the healthcare of all those other nations too? Face it. Your healthcare system is garbage.

[cybercoma]

Looking through the article, I think the title of the thread 'US dead last in health care' may not be supported by the reference.

The article discusses health in general, not specifically health care. In fact, it covers risk factors that lead to poor health (and premature death) that have nothing at all to do with the type of service you'd get from a doctor or hospital, such as higher caloric intake by people in the U.S. (which could contribute to death by heart disease), city designs that encourage driving and discourage walking/biking (which would contribute to heart disease and lung disease) and fewer people wearing seat belts (which contributes to deaths from car accidents.) Regardless of the type of health care system they had, they would likely have more premature deaths due to those factors.

Prevention is very much a part of healthcare.

[Guest American Woman]

You seem to be having trouble understanding that the United States is dead last. Are they supplementing the healthcare of all those other nations too? Face it. Your healthcare system is garbage.

A discussion consists of actual discussion, which is why I've raised these points - yet the only "discussion" some here seem to want is the response that Canada rocks and the U.S. sucks.

[WWWTT]

Canada ranks as high as it does in life expectancy, in part, because of your high immigration rate per capita - and your rigorous health screening/requirements - and nonacceptance of anyone with a disability. Such as this incident: A French family who immigrated to Montreal after being wooed by a Canadian embassy official in Paris has now been told they must leave the country because their daughter has cerebral palsy and places an "excessive burden on social services." It's called the "healthy immigrant effect."

Also, Canada wouldn't be faring as well it does if U.S. health care services weren't available as a 'safety net;' if it weren't possible to send patients to the U.S. when Canada lacks the facilities/capability to treat them. That helps the Canadian government spend less of it's GDP on health care, and it provides Canadians with care/services not available within their country.

Not according to my doctor!

My wife immigrated to Canada from China in 2011.When visiting our family physician,we were told that the medical screening is a basic generic program,no blood tests required,x-rays or any in depth searching.A lot gets through!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

The somebody doesn't know what they are talking about.

LOL!

[Guest American Woman]

Not according to my doctor!

Your government, by its immigration policy, as well as examples I've found - beg to differ.

My wife immigrated to Canada from China in 2011.When visiting our family physician,we were told that the medical screening is a basic generic program,no blood tests required,x-rays or any in depth searching.A lot gets through!

We may be speaking of different scenarios - as noted in the case I cited, the family in question moved to Canada, ie: were granted entry, started a successful business, and then 5 years later were denied permanent residency.

[cybercoma]

You're the one that keeps bringing up Canada. You and bush_cheney. If you don't want to talk about Canada, then don't bring it up. The fact of the matter is the OP has nothing to do with Canada in particular, nor is this in the Canada-US relations forum. It's you two that continue to bring up nonsense about the US supplementing the Canadian system, Canadians seeking healthcare in the US, etc. etc. That has absolutely nothing to do with the OP or the reasons that your country is dead last in health rankings. But your posts in this thread for pages and pages now have shown that you're incapable of actually discussing anything to do with the US unless you're draping yourself in the flag and chanting "USA! USA! USA!" like a braying ass.

[Guest American Woman]

You're the one that keeps bringing up Canada. You and bush_cheney.

Perhaps you didn't read past the first line of the opening post in this thread, so allow me to quote from the second line (emphasis mine) - "Going to a single payer system like ours..." and for clarification's sake, the "like ours" = Canada.

[WWWTT]

And yet you and others here worry immensely about that, while most Americans don't give a damn what happens in Canada.

Actually you take this far to personal.

I believe the point of the thread is that WE DO NOT WANT YOUR SYSTEM!

And in so describing what it is that we do not want,since you are American,you take it personal.

Like it or lump it,we are going to continue crying foul about your system to insure our stays intact!

WWWTT