Jump to content

The health care system is failing; give us choice.


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, herbie said:

My Mom was Big Nurse. My sister's a nurse. My other one's a lab tech, her daughter's a dietician. Went to college with and dated nurses in the punk era. Set up the computer systems, TV and internet links for clinics and hospitals here and remote reserves. Service computers for all the doctors in town and am friends with a couple of them.
Had an ex with substance and mental issues, a wife with diabetes, asthma and immune issues no one noticed the cancer and she died 3 days after they diagnosed it.
Had a kid with substance issues the OD cuz someone brought the shit into his hospital room. A sister who died from measles before they vaxxed everyone, and another that lost both hands and both feet cuz they diagnosed too slow.
Have to go for blood tests every 6 months at the hospital lab, a block from the doctor's office. In 10 years they've "lost" the results three times. And as I mentioned it takes 6 weeks to book an appt for a month's worth of pills.

No, I don't know anything at all about the medical system. Aside from almost any of the things mentioned would driven one to file for bankruptcy if I'd been born 20 miles south.

LOL - what a load of bullshit :)   First off - sounds like you know people who have had limited experience but you don't. 

Second - nurses know a limited amount about health care, head nurse might know a little more but dieticians know less and aren't terribly useful at the best of times. 

third off - you're the guy who claimed he trippled his house value overnight using his credit card :) LOL  - you get there's a credibility issue there right? :) 

You'd have more credibility as  a user of the system than the rest of that crap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2024 at 11:54 AM, blackbird said:

"From patients dying on waiting lists to “critically ill” patients being asked to share a single hospital bed , our system is in crisis. A recent Leger poll found that 64 per cent of Canadians believe it needs a “major change” while only five per cent felt more money was the solution. The public overwhelmingly understands that 30 years of throwing money at the system hasn’t worked."

Opinion: When Pierre Poilievre knocks on your door, demand health care choice (msn.com)

Conservative Americans predicted this.

The thing about UHC or SPHC is that it always paints with a broad brush. But, when cost is removed from the end user, demand soars and it must be met with benefit cuts, or increased taxes. The best health care is a catastrophic insurance plan with a reasonable deductible. That keeps the patient in the loop, allows doctors to compete on price and service and is affordable.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, herbie said:

But you who can't comprehend the meaning on a stop sign, know it all better than those stoopid elitist nurses and doctors.

The real question is - can you triple the value of the stop sign with your credit card?  :)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hard working person in Canada is at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to health care.

Half of Canadians reportedly believe in Socialism.  That means even though you may have worked hard all your life and saved your money and wisely invested and taken care of the finances, when you get a serious disease you could be put on a long waiting list and die before you get treatment.  That could be for heart problems, cancer, or anything.  The lazy loaf might just get faster treatment because of various factors such as his location, available services, and the number of patients.

But what does the Bible say?

"6  The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits."  2 Timothy 2:6

In other words, the person that has done the work should have more consideration than the lazy loaf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lazy person who happens to be in a strong union, even though he or she is irresponsible, lazy, and incompetent, will be protected by the union.  This applies to the health care system where many are in strong unions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

But what does the Bible say?

"6  The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits."  2 Timothy 2:6

In other words, the person that has done the work should have more consideration than the lazy loaf.

Paul was wrong, Jesus said in the parable of the eleventh hour workers that you deserve as much regardless of your labor and that in the Kingdom you work by choice, not because you were forced to, this is the reason for which there is no injustice whether you work hard or not. If you claim to be a christian you have to pay attention to what Jesus says first, not to anybody else.

Edited by Gaétan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gaétan said:

Paul was wrong,

Paul wrote most of the epistles in the New Testament, more than any other apostle.   He was chosen by God to be an apostle.  Yet you say he was wrong?  

" 16  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17  That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."   2 Timothy 3:16   

Paul was inspired by God to write a large part of Holy Scripture.  Yet you say he was wrong.  Seriously, you need to get a grip.  What makes you qualified to say an apostle was "wrong"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Paul wrote most of the epistles in the New Testament, more than any other apostle.   He was chosen by God to be an apostle.  Yet you say he was wrong?  

" 16  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17  That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."   2 Timothy 3:16   

Paul was inspired by God to write a large part of Holy Scripture.  Yet you say he was wrong.  Seriously, you need to get a grip.  What makes you qualified to say an apostle was "wrong"?

He was wrong because he said the opposite of Jesus Christ his teacher.  His tongue was quicker than the truth.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When people, mostly doctors, say that nurse practitioners are a poor alternative, I have to ask, alternative to what? One quarter of people in my province have no GPs. The alternative to NPs for them is no care at all, ie, suffering, and possibly dying, quietly at home or braving the tedious chaos of the emergency rooms where they don’t belong. We have a third possibility called health hubs here which are a complete joke. 

I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that a larger private sector is needed in our health care system. For me, the opportunity to be able to access a nurse practitioner in my town is preferable to talking to some random medico by zoom or having a GP who is plotting to leave as soon as they arrive. At this stage I would be willing to pay for a local NP. In terms of reform on the public side, I would favour the Dutch model of compulsory insurance. How that would be reconciled with our provincial/federal ‘system’, Lord only knows. 

One issue we have been unwilling to explore: why are Canadian medical grads turning away from towns in favour of the large cities? This is not a simple economic matter because towns of my size are crying out for them in many regions. When I arrived in my town we must have had at least 10 Canadian GPs under 50. Now we have none. There is something going on there that the sociologists and psychologists should investigate. It won’t be easy - the replies given by physicians on this matter are misleading and I’m not sure physicians themselves know the answers. One possible and controversial issue is assortative mating. I’ll leave it for others to discuss. 

And a small hack for rural Canada - a one year program in dermatology for GPs. In Britain they have the Dip Derm for this purpose. We need it far more than they do. Many people in my province can’t travel to see the dermatologists who are all in one place now. GPs see all the skin conditions - pay a few of them to treat them. 
 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

One issue we have been unwilling to explore: why are Canadian medical grads turning away from towns in favour of the large cities? This is not a simple economic matter because towns of my size are crying out for them in many regions.

Although I can't remember which province you're in I would bet good money that what the towns are crying for is general practitioners. The so-called family doctor. And the fact is that medical graduates are turning away from being family doctors in droves in favor of being specialists. Specialists get paid more, they get treated better, they have other advantages. Everybody wants to be a specialist, there is no value in being a GP instead.

Specialists are concentrated in the big cities because people can tend to come to them when necessary and this is where the clinics and hospitals that specialize in what the specialists do tend to be located. Not all but most.

Generally speaking the city with its attractions shopping culture social life is preferred by the majority of people. If you add into that the fact that nobody wants to be a GP at all even people who would consider life in the country wind up in the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GPs, now called family practitioners, would point out that they are trained specialists themselves but the distinction persists in common speech. The issue is, why are they paid less than people with easier jobs? In my opinion, being a GP in a rural location is much tougher than running a dermatology clinic in a city from the call viewpoint alone and you’ll make a third of the income if you are lucky. We need to pay them a lot more if we want to attract them there. If not, we need to be honest about it and tell patients it’s going to be foreign doctors, nurse practitioners and zoom for them from now on.

I am in NL. 
 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

GPs, now called family practitioners, would point out that they are trained specialists themselves but the distinction persists in common speech. The issue is, why are they paid less than people with easier jobs? In my opinion, being a GP in a rural location is much tougher than running a dermatology clinic in a city from the call viewpoint alone and you’ll make a third of the income if you are lucky. We need to pay them a lot more if we want to attract them there. If not, we need to be honest about it and tell patients it’s going to be foreign doctors, nurse practitioners and zoom for them from now on.

I am in NL. 
 

BC has made some recent changes to make it better. But there's still a long way to go and while the overall doctor to population ratio isn't all that mega super horrible compared to some provinces we still fall far behind in GP'S.

I agree with everything you said. Frankly I don't really find the idea of nurse practitioners all that terrible. And my doctor is foreign and I love her to death. But these are band-Aids. The simple fact is your right, we need to find ways to attract more Family practitioners as you call them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2024 at 7:54 PM, blackbird said:

The public overwhelmingly understands that 30 years of throwing money at the system hasn’t worked."

And yet when you talk about other countries, you average dumb Canadian will boast that our health care system is FREE, as if doctors work for free.

The issue is it is run by the government and anyone that is intelligent will know how terribly inefficient the government runs things.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

We need private heath care for those who wish to use alongside the existing public one for those who can't afford to pay.

So if anyone uses private health care, how is a rebate determined to the tax payer for those not needing government funded health care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, exPS said:

The issue is it is run by the government and anyone that is intelligent will know how terribly inefficient the government runs things.

Sure, but it's not hopeless.  It worked better in the past, delivered more coverage at less cost per person than other jurisdictions.  But I do take it as a given that government doesn't have the profit motive and runs things less efficienctly, generally.

I would say a small tax to private user to help alleviate the public system, along with new public stakeholder groups (online) to monitor key events, metrics and changes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I would say a small tax to private user to help alleviate the public system...

We are already taxed to death in Canada. The minute you start with a small tax, guess what...it gets bigger.

Cut government offices. The military for example uses up a large portion of the taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, exPS said:

So if anyone uses private health care, how is a rebate determined to the tax payer for those not needing government funded health care.

There is no rebate system. There will be private clinics and hospitals. If you choose to use them you will pay for services for a quicker and possibly better service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking to an older lady yesterday who told me she has arteries that are 75% blocked but the cardiologist or specialist she saw some times ago has not got back to her.  It has been months and she has heard nothing.  So she is not even on a waiting list.  Probably the case for many people now.  They may have serious medical issues but the system is so over loaded that people are just being neglected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I was talking to an older lady yesterday who told me she has arteries that are 75% blocked but the cardiologist or specialist she saw some times ago has not got back to her.  It has been months and she has heard nothing.  So she is not even on a waiting list.  Probably the case for many people now.  They may have serious medical issues but the system is so over loaded that people are just being neglected.

This is nothing compare to what I have heard. I have heard of cases (true or false I don't know) in which patients were diagnosed with cancer and had to be on waiting list for a long time. By the time they got to the top of the list cancer spread and it was all over and died.

Many Canadians die due too medical errors too.

https://www.guelphtoday.com/spotlight/medical-mistakes-are-the-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-canada-5787771#:~:text=The statistics are alarming.,die due to medical mistakes.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, exPS said:

1. We are already taxed to death in Canada.  

2. Cut government offices. The military for example uses up a large portion of the taxes.

1. Taxes for the wealthy have been dropping for decades, including corporate tax.  The idea that will stop it from getting bigger is putting citizens front and centre with the delivery groups to make them accountable for delivering value for $.
2. That's fine and well but anybody who is actually good at cutting things and focusing on value stays far away from government.  For example, me.  So you get career politicians like Poilievre, or grifters like Ford, or "Government is your friend" types like Trudeau to choose from.

Choose wisely.

Wait, cancel that... it doesn't matter who you choose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:


Wait, cancel that... it doesn't matter who you choose.

It absolutely does matter and that's a horrible thing to say. If you hate democracy so much go live in the country that doesn't have it for a while and come back and tell us all about how it doesn't matter.

Governments never spend as efficiently as private Enterprise tends to. So the correct answer is to vote for the guy who believes in smaller government. Harper believed in smaller governments that did last and focused on their core abilities and left provincial matters to the province. Poilievre tends to think the same way.

The smaller the government the more efficient it tends to be and the less waste you tend to have. Federal gov'ts should focus on core gov't tasks and that's it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,750
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Betsy Smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...