Why does Japan have six times more MRIs than Canada?

[User]

Just now, herbie said:

I've never needed one. The wife had several and we had to travel vernight for each one. So what?
You had to wait your turn. Like everyone everywhere has to. The fact you're here posting means it was an inconvenience and not proof the whole country's falling apart.

LOL, that about sums up the lefts thoughts on how bad the health care system is: So what!

Herbie would have been such a staunch communist that he would have proudly stood in the bread lines, cursing anyone complaining. 

 

[herbie]

The clueless twat offers his advice on how the people who need treatment now and those waiting before you should be passed by because you WANT yours Right F-cking Now. And can't even make them by waving your money around.
What an awful system.

Sure got a lot of opinions while not knowing how anything at all works.

[User]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

The clueless twat offers his advice on how the people who need treatment now and those waiting before you should be passed by because you WANT yours Right F-cking Now. And can't even make them by waving your money around.
What an awful system.

Sure got a lot of opinions while not knowing how anything at all works.

Yeah, sure, you and just about every average person can go to the grocery store and buy 100 different kinds of bread any time you want to, but of course, there is that poor homeless person on the street corner so f&ck your system, you should all be miserable and stand in line together. 

 

[August1991]

9 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

If you ask Google the question, Gemini comes back and says Japan has better outcomes for Less money overall... So it's a two-tier system, but there's a copay of up to $600 a month. You will pay 30% 

====

I think a two-tier system could do better, but we have a terrible mindset around management of services. Generally.. It's not like the government, Rogers, Bell, Canada, or the rest of The crowd really stand above each other.

I work in services, in Tech, and I'm constantly pointing out to people that you have to think of the customer... The person who pays the bills. People are far more interested, in Canada, in making their boss happy

 

 

Largely agree.

1. I suspect Japan spends zillions on MRI machines because a) they're older, b) they once had money

2. I suspect America spends  zillions on health care because a) they invent stuff, b) they litigate health care

[suds]

7 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

The Fed's role is national health standards, national certification and funding.  The Feds had a huge role in opening the door to mass immigration that further burdened the system and last year tried to address staffing shortages with the Express Entry program.  Are you pretending this is all the federal governments doing and that provincial governments are not responsible for the management of their healthcare systems?  

We have one Federal government and 10 Provincial governments, and according to you it's the 10 Provincial governments who don't know what the f*ck they're doing. I'd say, highly unlikely. In my first post I asked the question of why not simply emulate some of world's most successful healthcare systems? I believe I've found the answer to my own question. There are some experts who believe that the problem lies with the Canada Health Act, and more importantly, how any sitting federal government interprets the Act. Now, you mentioned the funding part. In order to get healthcare transfer payments from the government, the provinces must abide by the Act. If they don't they could lose some or possibly all of their share of the funding. So basically the way things are set up, the feds can dictate healthcare policy while any kind of reform or innovation by the provinces is killed due to fear of their funding being revoked.  Interesting. Your thoughts?

[LinkSoul60]

7 hours ago, suds said:

We have one Federal government and 10 Provincial governments, and according to you it's the 10 Provincial governments who don't know what the f*ck they're doing. I'd say, highly unlikely. In my first post I asked the question of why not simply emulate some of world's most successful healthcare systems? I believe I've found the answer to my own question. There are some experts who believe that the problem lies with the Canada Health Act, and more importantly, how any sitting federal government interprets the Act. Now, you mentioned the funding part. In order to get healthcare transfer payments from the government, the provinces must abide by the Act. If they don't they could lose some or possibly all of their share of the funding. So basically the way things are set up, the feds can dictate healthcare policy while any kind of reform or innovation by the provinces is killed due to fear of their funding being revoked.  Interesting. Your thoughts?

I have no idea if we should emulate another countries healthcare system but like everything else all successful models should be looked at.  But yes, Provinces/Territories have significantly more control over the day to day performance and delivery of healthcare services than the Federal government does. That said I wasn't aware of the nuances a provinces reform and innovation has on its funding but the premise starts with the health act that we've had since 1984.  It's a very interesting dilemma we have going with our aging population.  We have some provinces that perform better than others so to your question/comment, look elsewhere but also look inwards to see why some work better than others.  I don't know what the answers are but certainly know more healthcare workers in every Provinces system is a good place to start.

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

I have no idea if we should emulate another countries healthcare system but like everything else all successful models should be looked at.  But yes, Provinces/Territories have significantly more control over the day to day performance and delivery of healthcare services than the Federal government does. That said I wasn't aware of the nuances a provinces reform and innovation has on its funding but the premise starts with the health act that we've had since 1984.  It's a very interesting dilemma we have going with our aging population.  We have some provinces that perform better than others so to your question/comment, look elsewhere but also look inwards to see why some work better than others.  I don't know what the answers are but certainly know more healthcare workers in every Provinces system is a good place to start.

 

 

A management mindset needs to be pursued.  My understanding is that they're employing a lot more young people with medical management training, think of it like a medical MBA.  I would seed separate organizations to perform specific medical services, then grow those out and take relief off the system.  You COULD have some user pay aspects in those models also, but I would mandate that they must provide service improvements to the most needy, for no charge, as well or lose their mandate.

[LinkSoul60]

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

A management mindset needs to be pursued.  My understanding is that they're employing a lot more young people with medical management training, think of it like a medical MBA.  I would seed separate organizations to perform specific medical services, then grow those out and take relief off the system.  You COULD have some user pay aspects in those models also, but I would mandate that they must provide service improvements to the most needy, for no charge, as well or lose their mandate.

The management though is with the Provinces/Territories so that's where a mindset is/would need to be.  I get what you're saying with separate organizations for services, but that could also add more complexity and cost could it not.  We have pay for play options today with private healthcare services but the majority of Canadian's prefer and expect the universal healthcare we've had for decades.  There are not many problems in the world that can't be solved with thoughtful planning and the financial means to achieve the desired outcomes, and ultimately that's the logical route to improve our system as the burden only becomes larger as we age.  

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

The management though is with the Provinces/Territories so that's where a mindset is/would need to be.  I get what you're saying with separate organizations for services, but that could also add more complexity and cost could it not.  We have pay for play options today with private healthcare services but the majority of Canadian's prefer and expect the universal healthcare we've had for decades.  There are not many problems in the world that can't be solved with thoughtful planning and the financial means to achieve the desired outcomes, and ultimately that's the logical route to improve our system as the burden only becomes larger as we age.  

Yes, agreed.  It would add cost for the initial investment.  

"Thoughtful planning" is dependent on culture and my take on the Canadian management culture is always that Canadians think "My boss first, the customer second".  The concept of innovation or change is akin to revolution or maybe like suggesting live mice be let loose in the hospitals.

 

[LinkSoul60]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes, agreed.  It would add cost for the initial investment.  

"Thoughtful planning" is dependent on culture and my take on the Canadian management culture is always that Canadians think "My boss first, the customer second".  The concept of innovation or change is akin to revolution or maybe like suggesting live mice be let loose in the hospitals.

 

No disagreement at all on the culture comment and how that filters down. In that scenario though and given the management is the responsibility of the province we'd need a standard alignment on how they manage their healthcare systems. Not sure if that would add more complexity and disagreement or not...   In this titled thread though bypassing the healthcare wait lines and finding a private MRI is easy enough, but like private healthcare that comes down to a persons financial means, which many simply cannot afford.  Suppose that's the beauty of the universal care we've accepted as part of our culture....with its warts and all.

[eyeball]

11 hours ago, suds said:

So basically the way things are set up, the feds can dictate healthcare policy while any kind of reform or innovation by the provinces is killed due to fear of their funding being revoked.  Interesting. Your thoughts?

In either case I think both levels of our governments are far enough away from the ground where people need healthcare that accountability to those people is easy to avoid. 

Germany, often touted as having a better system than ours, is far more decentralized than ours. Close enough to the ground that people matter and are better positioned to influence policymaking.

Germany: Highly decentralized via approximately 1,000 autonomous statutory sickness funds. These funds are regional or employment-based and operate independently of the federal government for daily management and funding.

Canada: Operates a single-payer system where provincial and territorial governments act as the sole insurers within their respective regions. There is no choice between different public insurers.

It occurs to me that Japan simply being an island and a much geographically smaller place would similarly make it more difficult for administrators to distance themselves from the public they serve.

[suds]

15 hours ago, User said:

Yeah, sure, you and just about every average person can go to the grocery store and buy 100 different kinds of bread any time you want to, but of course, there is that poor homeless person on the street corner so f&ck your system, you should all be miserable and stand in line together. 

 

That's it exactly! It doesn't matter if something works or it doesn't work. The important thing is that everyone should be treated equally. 

[suds]

1 hour ago, LinkSoul60 said:

No disagreement at all on the culture comment and how that filters down. In that scenario though and given the management is the responsibility of the province we'd need a standard alignment on how they manage their healthcare systems. Not sure if that would add more complexity and disagreement or not...   In this titled thread though bypassing the healthcare wait lines and finding a private MRI is easy enough, but like private healthcare that comes down to a persons financial means, which many simply cannot afford.  Suppose that's the beauty of the universal care we've accepted as part of our culture....with its warts and all.

Is it not possible to have a user payer system where what the payer actually pays is based on income, age, or long term ailment/disability?  Where those under a certain income pay nothing? Why is this idea that nobody has to pay for anything so important? According to a 2025 study by the CD Howe Institute (comparing Canada's healthcare with international peers), Canada ranked 9 out of 10. There was not one single province that didn't fall below the international average for acceptable healthcare. The only real good thing the study had to say was that once Canadians had access to the system, the quality of care was exceptional. As most of us already know, the main problem is long wait times, finding a doctor, and getting timely access for treatment. It also recommended adopting practices from countries that ran successful healthcare systems. Jeez, who would have thought of that? I would also have to believe that a number of these countries ahead of us (our peers) have aging populations also. What we have right now in this country in terms of healthcare is not what I would consider to be equitable. Nor do I have a clue of what has to be done. What I do understand though is that it's the provinces that do the managing, while it's the Feds who set the agenda and make the rules as I've explained before. Do whatever, just fix it.

[LinkSoul60]

7 minutes ago, suds said:

Is it not possible to have a user payer system where what the payer actually pays is based on income, age, or long term ailment/disability?  Where those under a certain income pay nothing? Why is this idea that nobody has to pay for anything so important? According to a 2025 study by the CD Howe Institute (comparing Canada's healthcare with international peers), Canada ranked 9 out of 10. There was not one single province that didn't fall below the international average for acceptable healthcare. The only real good thing the study had to say was that once Canadians had access to the system, the quality of care was exceptional. As most of us already know, the main problem is long wait times, finding a doctor, and getting timely access for treatment. It also recommended adopting practices from countries that ran successful healthcare systems. Jeez, who would have thought of that? I would also have to believe that a number of these countries ahead of us (our peers) have aging populations also. What we have right now in this country in terms of healthcare is not what I would consider to be equitable. Nor do I have a clue of what has to be done. What I do understand though is that it's the provinces that do the managing, while it's the Feds who set the agenda and make the rules as I've explained before. Do whatever, just fix it.

Sure it's possible to have that user payer system but fundamentally, that's not Canada and our universal healthcare program.  I don't say that to disagree but say it because it would get us similar to US healthcare which is far more accessible, but also far more costly for individuals. I probably agree though that at some point that will become a much larger conversation of moving more towards that type model.  The immediate need is to find solutions to those wait times and accessible care. It's not only an aging population but fair to say our population growth has contributed greatly to the current challenges. Without getting into the political why's of that, we obviously need to level set the healthcare worker support numbers to align with our new population.  BC has recruited 414 US trained doctors, nurses and other professionals in the past year which will help, but many more are required.  Do more bodies in our healthcare solve the problems...probably not all but it would sure help in going a long way to lessen those wait times and having available family doctors for the masses. Couldn't agree more... do what needs to be done to fix this...and do it sooner than later.

[User]

1 hour ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Sure it's possible to have that user payer system but fundamentally, that's not Canada and our universal healthcare program.  I don't say that to disagree but say it because it would get us similar to US healthcare which is far more accessible, but also far more costly for individuals. I probably agree though that at some point that will become a much larger conversation of moving more towards that type model.  The immediate need is to find solutions to those wait times and accessible care. It's not only an aging population but fair to say our population growth has contributed greatly to the current challenges. Without getting into the political why's of that, we obviously need to level set the healthcare worker support numbers to align with our new population.  BC has recruited 414 US trained doctors, nurses and other professionals in the past year which will help, but many more are required.  Do more bodies in our healthcare solve the problems...probably not all but it would sure help in going a long way to lessen those wait times and having available family doctors for the masses. Couldn't agree more... do what needs to be done to fix this...and do it sooner than later.

Your system is costly now. 

Anecdotal, but my good friend who is middle class earner complains all the time about his effective tax rate.

From what I can see, it looks like on average middle class to middle class, it is 70% more for a Canadian:

https://businesscouncilab.com/insights-category/economic-insights/the-typical-canadian-pays-70-more-income-tax-than-the-typical-american/

Nothing is free. You pay for this stuff in different ways. 

 

[suds]

30 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Sure it's possible to have that user payer system but fundamentally, that's not Canada and our universal healthcare program.  I don't say that to disagree but say it because it would get us similar to US healthcare which is far more accessible, but also far more costly for individuals. I probably agree though that at some point that will become a much larger conversation of moving more towards that type model.  The immediate need is to find solutions to those wait times and accessible care. It's not only an aging population but fair to say our population growth has contributed greatly to the current challenges. Without getting into the political why's of that, we obviously need to level set the healthcare worker support numbers to align with our new population.  BC has recruited 414 US trained doctors, nurses and other professionals in the past year which will help, but many more are required.  Do more bodies in our healthcare solve the problems...probably not all but it would sure help in going a long way to lessen those wait times and having available family doctors for the masses. Couldn't agree more... do what needs to be done to fix this...and do it sooner than later.

Well obviously we will need more doctors, and nurses, hospital beds, more hospitals, and the list goes on and on. And yet you still maintain that this is strictly the provinces fault, and the federal government can just wash their hands of it. Next you'll be telling me they had nothing to do with the severe housing shortages, the cost of housing, or the cost of food. But in this particular case, why does it have to be a choice between our current healthcare system which isn't working very well (compared to most of our peers), or the U.S. system which in my opinion is great in some respects and absolutely horrible in others. If that's the only alternative being offered to Canadians then I don't blame them for wanting to keep our present system. But that's hardly the case as you well know. User fees aren't going to break us. You pay what you can afford to pay based on one's finances. Private hospitals aren't the worst thing in the world either as they'd clean up a lot of the backlog. Or is there something etched in stone somewhere which demands we can't reform our present system in any way? I'm open to anything that seems to be working successfully in countries similar to our own and that's fair to everyone.

[LinkSoul60]

2 minutes ago, User said:

Your system is costly now. 

Anecdotal, but my good friend who is middle class earner complains all the time about his effective tax rate.

From what I can see, it looks like on average middle class to middle class, it is 70% more for a Canadian:

https://businesscouncilab.com/insights-category/economic-insights/the-typical-canadian-pays-70-more-income-tax-than-the-typical-american/

Nothing is free. You pay for this stuff in different ways. 

 

Correct, we have higher tax rates that helps fund our universal healthcare. We also have a much small population and economic base. That has been known and accepted for 40 years but now we're at a critical point in healthcare that needs to be fixed. 

[LinkSoul60]

5 minutes ago, suds said:

Well obviously we will need more doctors, and nurses, hospital beds, more hospitals, and the list goes on and on. And yet you still maintain that this is strictly the provinces fault, and the federal government can just wash their hands of it. Next you'll be telling me they had nothing to do with the severe housing shortages, the cost of housing, or the cost of food. But in this particular case, why does it have to be a choice between our current healthcare system which isn't working very well (compared to most of our peers), or the U.S. system which in my opinion is great in some respects and absolutely horrible in others. If that's the only alternative being offered to Canadians then I don't blame them for wanting to keep our present system. But that's hardly the case as you well know. User fees aren't going to break us. You pay what you can afford to pay based on one's finances. Private hospitals aren't the worst thing in the world either as they'd clean up a lot of the backlog. Or is there something etched in stone somewhere which demands we can't reform our present system in any way? I'm open to anything that seems to be working successfully in countries similar to our own and that's fair to everyone.

I'm not at all saying that. Of course the federal government needs to be accountable, but it's not total accountability.  Provinces are responsible for the management of their systems, not the federal government. I got no political hat on but you do understand that, right.  Regardless, caught a short blurb on the radio earlier that Alberta is proposing a two-tiered system that aligns closely with countries who have successful programs. How or if that would conflict with universal care I have no idea because I didn't hear enough. I'm not sure either that a system scaled to your income would be popular.  If it's a revenue thing just increase the tax threshold for higher income earners with that revenue going directly to healthcare.  Private hospitals are something to look at as well but that requires private investment (easy enough) and both nationally and provincially certified workers so it still comes back to bodies....we need more and why recruitment efforts have escalated. Again, agree with you and open to 'most' anything that works well elsewhere and can work within our tax base and geography (which in itself is a challenge).

 

 

[eyeball]

19 minutes ago, suds said:

Or is there something etched in stone somewhere which demands we can't reform our present system in any way?

I think one thing that's indelibly imprinted on Canadians concerns is that having more money will facilitate queue jumping.

As for more doctors let's not forget Cuba has some 9.5 doctors per 1000 people and Canada has 2.5. We shouldn't be overlooking this if we're truly committed to looking at healthcare systems around the world.

I mean, health outcomes in Cuba, at least up until very recently with the world trying to squash them into complete submission, have been amongst the highest for a reason. And I doubt it's just low wages at $120 a month per doctor.

[eyeball]

We should turn Cuba into a medical paradise. Line a bunch of sunny beaches with hospitals and send everyone there for treatment and recovery.

A buddy of mine was commenting the other day he had just about every other tooth in his head worked on in Thailand for what it costs to get a root canal done here in BC.

And we have some 13000 doctors in Canada dying to be doctors who're flipping burgers and driving Uber Eats instead.

It's fùcking pathetic.

Edited March 19 by eyeball

[I am Groot]

22 hours ago, herbie said:

The clueless twat offers his advice on how the people who need treatment now and those waiting before you should be passed by because you WANT yours Right F-cking Now.

What's wrong with a system like Japan where everyone gets their treatment now?

[I am Groot]

4 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Sure it's possible to have that user payer system but fundamentally, that's not Canada

Tommy Douglas had user fees in his public healthcare system.

4 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

and our universal healthcare program.  I don't say that to disagree but say it because it would get us similar to US healthcare which is far more accessible, but also far more costly for individuals.

A lot of EU countries have user fees that are waived for the poor.

4 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

I probably agree though that at some point that will become a much larger conversation of moving more towards that type model.  The immediate need is to find solutions to those wait times and accessible care. It's not only an aging population but fair to say our population growth has contributed greatly to the current challenges. Without getting into the political why's of that, we obviously need to level set the healthcare worker support numbers to align with our new population.  BC has recruited 414 US trained doctors, nurses and other professionals in the past year which will help, but many more are required.  

We could look at bringing over doctors and nurses to serve as teachers so we could rapidly expand our nursing colleges and medical schools for one. They need to be pumping out at least twice as many doctors and nurses as they are now. We could also look at the government paying tuition on the legal agreement that the graduating doctors would work in underserved areas for a set period of time. We could be actively trying to recruit doctors and nurses from other countries, as well.

[LinkSoul60]

27 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Tommy Douglas had user fees in his public healthcare system.

A lot of EU countries have user fees that are waived for the poor.

We could look at bringing over doctors and nurses to serve as teachers so we could rapidly expand our nursing colleges and medical schools for one. They need to be pumping out at least twice as many doctors and nurses as they are now. We could also look at the government paying tuition on the legal agreement that the graduating doctors would work in underserved areas for a set period of time. We could be actively trying to recruit doctors and nurses from other countries, as well.

I'm not saying that I'm against exploring that, I'm saying the majority would be...and that's just a guess. That's not going to solve the core problems of wait times and available healthcare though.

We do look around the world for doctors and nurses but it's going to take longer for them to get certified to practice here.  I like your point .... incentify them to move here. Teaching wouldn't be an option though unless they are certified with Canadian Medical Council credentials. 

A qualified person from the US is far easier to get certified, and probably a lot want to get out anyway. BC has had good success recently....2,570 US applicants since Mar/25 with over 1,000 nurses and 210 doctors trained and certified.  I don't know all the nuances of federal payments, reimbursements, etc but the problem is obvious....we're short of people for a lot of reasons. Level setting the doctor and nurse to patient ratio needs be the priority.

Edited March 20 by LinkSoul60

[suds]

18 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

I'm not at all saying that. Of course the federal government needs to be accountable, but it's not total accountability.  Provinces are responsible for the management of their systems, not the federal government. I got no political hat on but you do understand that, right.  Regardless, caught a short blurb on the radio earlier that Alberta is proposing a two-tiered system that aligns closely with countries who have successful programs. How or if that would conflict with universal care I have no idea because I didn't hear enough. I'm not sure either that a system scaled to your income would be popular.  If it's a revenue thing just increase the tax threshold for higher income earners with that revenue going directly to healthcare.  Private hospitals are something to look at as well but that requires private investment (easy enough) and both nationally and provincially certified workers so it still comes back to bodies....we need more and why recruitment efforts have escalated. Again, agree with you and open to 'most' anything that works well elsewhere and can work within our tax base and geography (which in itself is a challenge).

 

 

All universal healthcare means is that everyone has equal access. And I'm sure that would be the case in Europe because I doubt Europeans (or Canadians) would put up with anything less. In the Netherlands everyone is forced to pay mandatory private healthcare insurance and over 99% of the people have doctors. If you can't afford the insurance then it's subsidized by government. Most of the best run healthcare systems have private and publicly run hospitals, and what's best about it is that everyone has choices. As the CD Howe Institute study claims, competition makes for better healthcare. In my opinion, it's a mistake to give government such a monopoly over healthcare, because what we're basically doing is giving them a monopoly over life and death. We pay taxes which goes into general revenues and then what happens to it after that is anybody's guess. That's for both federal and provincial. We know how wasteful and incompetent governments can be, where political considerations are always the first priority and which makes reform of anything almost impossible. Yep, we gotta start looking at the European systems of healthcare because ours has just turned into a giant money pit.   JMO

[suds]

And by the way, f*ck Cuba. The last thing we need is a bunch of Cubans up here telling us how to run our country.   again..... JMO

from AI....   

Cuban doctors earn roughly $40 to $60/month USD  while working domestically. Although this is higher than the average salary for many other state-employed sectors, it is significantly less than workers in tourism-related fields (e.g., taxi drivers) who can make more in a day with tips than a doctor makes in a month.      nice! 

Edited March 20 by suds