Michael Moore's 'Sicko' Scrutinizes Canada's Healthcar

[bush_cheney2004]

Looks like it is easier to get a handgun than a implantable defibrillator in Canada:

Fewer than a third of Canadians who survive a heart attack are getting a potentially life-saving device to keep them from having another heart-stopping event, according to new research published this month in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

...Birnie's study tracked 3,793 Canadians who survived a cardiac arrest between from 1994 to 2003. His team found that just 16.6 per cent received an implantable defibrillator. Yet in the U.S., 30.2 per cent of heart attack patients got them during the same time period -- more than double the Canadian rate.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

[Guest American Woman]

Looks like it is easier to get a handgun than a implantable defibrillator in Canada:

Fewer than a third of Canadians who survive a heart attack are getting a potentially life-saving device to keep them from having another heart-stopping event, according to new research published this month in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

...Birnie's study tracked 3,793 Canadians who survived a cardiac arrest between from 1994 to 2003. His team found that just 16.6 per cent received an implantable defibrillator. Yet in the U.S., 30.2 per cent of heart attack patients got them during the same time period -- more than double the Canadian rate.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Yet Canadians have a higher life expectancy than Americans. Guess those defibrillators aren't helping Americans live longer.

Seriously, though. Your article doesn't in any way say it's difficult to get an implantable defibrillator in Cananda; in fact, it says:

"...Simpson suspects many doctors and patients simply aren't asking for them."

So your "easier to get a handgun than a implantable defibrillator in Canada" rhetoric is nothing more than your uneducated opinion.

[jdobbin]

Yet Canadians have a higher life expectancy than Americans. Guess those defibrillators aren't helping Americans live longer.

Seriously, though. Your article doesn't in any way say it's difficult to get an implantable defibrillator in Cananda; in fact, it says:

"...Simpson suspects many doctors and patients simply aren't asking for them."

So your "easier to get a handgun than a implantable defibrillator in Canada" rhetoric is nothing more than your uneducated opinion.

Good call on this. Some people seem determined to run down Canada at every turn though.

Awareness of techniques often bring better numbers in terms of use. I've never heard anyone turned down for one of these or access being limited for costs. I don't know that a doctor would even consider what the cost was.

[Renegade]

It is interesting to note that the of the Americans on this thread, the two most ardent supporters of healthcare reform in the US are two who are uninsured. I wonder if this is reflective of the US population's attitude in general. While there are a significant number of uninsured Americans, the majority are covered.

Will the majority who are covered care enough about the minority who are not to advocate for healthcare reform or do they only start to care once they find themselves without insurance or alternatives? Possibly this is the biggest impediment to healthcare reform in the US.

Edited July 15, 2007 by Renegade

[bush_cheney2004]

Seriously, though. Your article doesn't in any way say it's difficult to get an implantable defibrillator in Cananda; in fact, it says:

"...Simpson suspects many doctors and patients simply aren't asking for them."

So your "easier to get a handgun than a implantable defibrillator in Canada" rhetoric is nothing more than your uneducated opinion.

Actually, it's my educated opinion. Your penchant for questioning my intellectual abilities and education will not make the story go away. This trend is similar for revascularization after MIs in Canada...there is just less choice for patients compared to the US. If cost is the reason, please let those with the cash and/or insurance have choices while the egalitarian elites suffer equally for the good of mankind.

[bush_cheney2004]

Good call on this. Some people seem determined to run down Canada at every turn though.

Whaaaa..he's picking on Canada again. This board is only for fragging Americans and Israelis..it's just not fair when they bite back!

[jdobbin]

It is interesting to note that the of the Americans on this thread, the two most ardent supporters of healthcare reform in the US are two who are uninsured. I wonder if this is reflective of the US population's attitude in general. While there are a significant number of uninsured Americans, the majority are covered.

Will the majority who are covered care enough about the minority who are not to advocate for healthcare reform or do they only start to care once they find themselves without insurance or alternatives? Possibly this is the biggest impediment to healthcare reform in the US.

Some times things get to the breaking point. I think that is what happened with car insurance at some point in a number of Canadian provinces and it eventually went over the tipping point.

It is easier for people to ignore the problem when it is affects 10 to 15% of the population. However, when people start to face the problem themselves with costs and healthcare, they push the demand for change. I think that is what happened with prescriptions in the U.S. It remains to be seen whether what they came up with will be the overall solution.

[jbg]

Will the majority who are covered care enough about the minority who are not to advocate for healthcare reform or do they only start to care once they find themselves without insurance or alternatives? Possibly this is the biggest impediment to healthcare reform in the US.

My employer pays $15,000 per year, or $10,000 after taxes, to insure me. That lowers my salary significantly.

I have a real problem with picking up the bill for freeloaders, not all of them poor by a longshot.

[bush_cheney2004]

My employer pays $15,000 per year, or $10,000 after taxes, to insure me. That lowers my salary significantly.

I have a real problem with picking up the bill for freeloaders, not all of them poor by a longshot.

Yes, that is one of the main rubs. The truly poor in the US can qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP and numerous state sponsored programs that we already pay for.

[jdobbin]

CNN Replies to Moore.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/...upta/index.html

In response to a letter Michael Moore wrote about CNN's reporting on his documentary "SiCKO," a CNN spokesperson released the following statement:

"It's ironic that someone who has made a career out of holding powerful interests accountable is so sensitive to having his own work held up to the light by impartial journalists, as we did in our examination of 'SiCKO,' " the spokesperson said.

"In our original report, we made one mistake, which we apologized for and corrected on air and online six days ago, despite Mr. Moore's claim yesterday in his letter to us. Further, the e-mail Mr. Moore released in an effort to cast doubt on our reporting does no such thing.

"We appreciate Mr. Moore's attention to the important subject of health care and have featured him on CNN four times to discuss his movie and our reporting on it. While Mr. Moore may want to continue the discussion in order to drive publicity to his movie, we have presented the facts and are comfortable letting the viewers judge for themselves.

"We have zero vested interest in shading the numbers to tell a certain story. Suggesting otherwise, of Dr. Gupta or of CNN, just doesn't hold water," the spokesperson concluded.

CNN has always prided itself on balanced reporting of claims made by special-interest groups. Moore's documentary "SiCKO," which makes an impassioned case for a complete overhaul of the U.S. health care system, was not exempt from that reporting.

[marcinmoka]

My employer pays $15,000 per year, or $10,000 after taxes, to insure me. That lowers my salary significantly.

Wow. That is what it costs to provide health care for 3 Canadians.

I would just be a tad blaze knowing that I would have to insure myself against $40 Hospital Bath Sponges, or $25 boxes of facial tissue. And those lawyers/malpractice fees....ohh boy.

What I find ironic is that the American desire for anti-bureaucratic healthcare in fact spawned a system which spends almost twice as much per patient on bureaucratic work alone compared to Europe.

Private enterprise is the way to go. Almost always. It is more efficient. More transparent. But in medicine, I have my doubts. Medicine is what I deem a vital service, along with Fire, Rescue & Policing. Should we make the Fire Service, just as it was in the old days? No, because it is an emergency, unplanned service and you are dealing with peoples lives.

Knowing full well the gravity of their services, unregulated for-profit healthcare providers can gouge their customers (individuals, or HMO's which later gouge employers who gouge their employees). A victim in need of an angioplasty cannot simply "shop around" for the best deal when they are on the brink of death. They are price takers. And this despite the relatively healthy level of competition.

Granted, despite this post, I still do believe that there is room for some Private Insurance firms, as our current system in Canada puts too much a burden on Tax Payers. Alors...

...while I found France to be a bureaucratic mess all too often, their health care system was something we could take a pointer off (unlike the 35hr week, which is an absurd idea and would of been their death had Sarko not prevailed). The state will cover about 80% of costs. The remaining 20 are yours. You can pay out of pocket, or buy private insurance for the remainder. This system discourages Hypochondriacs as well providing a means to unload at least a decent sized chunk of the health care bill.

[marcinmoka]

I wish I had access to the actual paper sadly, I am at not near a school comp, but alas, a summary is the next best I can do.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publicatio...m?doc_id=283969

The latest data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which compare trends among 30 industrialized countries, show that the U.S. spent $5,267 per capita on health care in 2002—53 percent more than any other country.

[bush_cheney2004]

The latest data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which compare trends among 30 industrialized countries, show that the U.S. spent $5,267 per capita on health care in 2002—53 percent more than any other country.

Because we can....from boob jobs to gastric bypass surgery. Canada spends less..and delivers less.

[geoffrey]

My employer pays $15,000 per year, or $10,000 after taxes, to insure me. That lowers my salary significantly.

Wow. That is what it costs to provide health care for 3 Canadians.

Nah. That's what it costs to patch up 3 Canadians and send them on their way. JBG's figure likely includes prescription drug coverage, hospital rooms, ambulance coverage, paramedical services (chiropractic, physio)... none of these are paid for in Canada. Your employer (assuming here, I know mine/most do(es)) pays thousands a year to give you coverage in those areas on top of the quoted government spending figure. It's highly understated.

Not to mention when people get truly sick or sick with things that Canadian doctors aren't motived to treat, they must spend the $15k+ on American insurance and more on travel in order to received first world health care treatment.

It's hardly a fair cost comparison when your looking at apples to oranges. JBG gets some sweet first class care for that. We get patched and kicked to the curb. We wait years to get hips and joints fixed, a huge drain on people's standards of living. We wait 24 hours in a hospital to get a broken bone set. These are all huge time and productivity costs.

By the way, much of what we get in Canada for "free", American hospitals are obliged by law to provide in an emergency. They must stablize you before discharge regardless of your ability to pay.

I'm very skeptical at a cost comparison that doesn't include all these factors.

Edited July 16, 2007 by geoffrey

[jbg]

JBG's figure likely includes prescription drug coverage, hospital rooms, ambulance coverage, paramedical services (chiropractic, physio)... none of these are paid for in Canada. Your employer (assuming here, I know mine/most do(es)) pays thousands a year to give you coverage in those areas on top of the quoted government spending figure. It's highly understated.

Includes, in theory, coverage for 80% of those items, with a deductible of about $600 per year or so per person. In practice, between 60% and 80% of bills are covered.

[marcinmoka]

Nah. That's what it costs to patch up 3 Canadians and send them on their way. JBG's figure likely includes prescription drug coverage, hospital rooms, ambulance coverage, paramedical services (chiropractic, physio)... none of these are paid for in Canada.

Proof? I am just curious whether this figure also includes the deductible.

*Note, this should say 2, not 3. Je m'excuse.

Canada spends less..and delivers less.

Proof ?

If we look at infant mortality? Or life expectancy?

I am not saying the U.S doesn't have brilliant healthcare, I am just pointing out that they pay a fortune and seemingly do not do better in many realms. The knee jerk reaction of saying that quality will suffer is nothing more than that. The claims is made over and over, but never backed up by anything.

We get patched and kicked to the curb.

We? No. But is there anything you would like to share?

JBG gets some sweet first class care for that

For $40, that bath sponge best work miracles.

By the way, much of what we get in Canada for "free", American hospitals are obliged by law to provide in an emergency.

Yes. Yes they do. But they still spend twice as much money doing it and getting the same, or worse results.

I'm very skeptical at a cost comparison that doesn't include all these factors.

I'm sorry, but will take take the OECDs word over your gut feeling, that is unless, you have some thing to back it up.

Edited July 16, 2007 by marcinmoka

[bush_cheney2004]

Includes, in theory, coverage for 80% of those items, with a deductible of about $600 per year or so per person. In practice, between 60% and 80% of bills are covered.

That sounds about right, plus we get dental with adult/child ortho, some vision/eyecare, mental health (usually 10 paid visits to the shrink less a small copay), and prescription drugs. Add to that short term and long term disability pay, and most employees with coverage do fine. Some complain of their rising contributions to the premium, but it sure beats the alternative.

[bush_cheney2004]

Canada spends less..and delivers less.

Proof ?

If we look at infant mortality? Or life expectancy?

I am not saying the U.S doesn't have brilliant healthcare, I am just pointing out that they pay a fortune and seemingly do not do better in many realms. The knee jerk reaction of saying that quality will suffer is nothing more than that. The claims is made over and over, but never backed up by anything.

No, I'm talking about a broad range of medical services and procedures with the capacity to deliver them all much sooner than in Canada. I've already cited facts for defibs and revascularization, but it could just as well be boob jobs or diagnostic imaging. Americans have access to services that are simply unavailable in Canada on short order notice. Canada's provinces quietly send patients to the USA for treatment.

Yes...we spend more...but we also get more.

Example: My kid wanted to play football, which requires a doctor's physical. Doctor hears heart murmur in stethoscope and refers us to the imaging and sonogram lab. We simply drive over to the hospital and they take us right in for the procedure. I'm watching and listening to my kid's heart valves open and close same day. I'm covered at 100% for lab work. Schweet!

Edited July 16, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[marcinmoka]

Americans have access to services that are simply unavailable in Canada on short order notice

Caveat. Insured (Private/Medicaid/Medicare) Americans.

Yes...we spend more...but we also get more.

But in the macro picture, we spend less, our children are more likely to survive, and we tend to live longer. And though we complain about our health related tax burden, few raise a stink about the American burden seeing as per patient care is astronomical.

Edited July 16, 2007 by marcinmoka

[bush_cheney2004]

But in the macro picture, we spend less, our children are more likely to survive, and we tend to live longer.

But that doesn't mean jack to people with the means to do better and faster. Many Americans do not place a high value on egalitarian suffering. Many Canadians agree, spending their own cash to go to the head of the line.

And no, even uninsured Americans have access to faster services...all it takes is a credit card with a nice limit.

Edited July 16, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[SkyhookJackson]

But in the macro picture, we spend less, our children are more likely to survive, and we tend to live longer.

But that doesn't mean jack to people with the means to do better and faster. Many Americans do not place a high value on egalitarian suffering. Many Canadians agree, spending their own cash to go to the head of the line.

And no, even uninsured Americans have access to faster services...all it takes is a credit card with a nice limit.

You are so full of it. There are many, many people of means who care a great deal about those less fortunate than themselves. Americans are, at the core, a caring people (taking away the black eyes such as yourself). Uninsured Americans do not have faster services, yada, yada, yada. Without the elusive high credit card limit they often go without. Uninsured Americans who do not qualify for Medicaid are given minimal care unless it's a life or death situation. I know that for a fact because I've lived it. On another board I frequent there was a fairly well known political activist who developed pancreatic cancer. He was uninsured. There was one surgeon at one hospital who would give him his only chance for survival. The hospital demanded $50,000 up front, cash on the barrel head. We raised the money online in about a week and he had the surgery. Sadly, since he was uninsured, he was discharged to his home on the other side of the nation prematurely, didn't receive adequate follow-up, and died. He probably would have died anyway, given the survival rate of pancreatic cancer, but an insured person wouldn't have been treated in that fashion. I'm afraid, BC2004, you're in for a rude awakening very soon. There will come a day when there are no bake sales and car washes to benefit sick people trying to pay medical bills.

[bush_cheney2004]

You are so full of it. There are many, many people of means who care a great deal about those less fortunate than themselves. Americans are, at the core, a caring people (taking away the black eyes such as yourself). Uninsured Americans do not have faster services, yada, yada, yada. ...... I'm afraid, BC2004, you're in for a rude awakening very soon. There will come a day when there are no bake sales and car washes to benefit sick people trying to pay medical bills.

Hmmm...I've suffered your personal attacks long enough...time to rub your nose in it. Your sob stories are just that, and quite self serving (just like me). You don't have insurance for reasons that I am not responsible for, nor are the rest of Americans to blame for your circumstances. Why have so many others figured it out without a pity pot for begging? There are people who take jobs they don't want just to get health insurance for themselves and/or family. So what is YOUR problem?

And guess what..the "well known" (so what) activist would have been just as dead in Canada.

[SkyhookJackson]

You are so full of it. There are many, many people of means who care a great deal about those less fortunate than themselves. Americans are, at the core, a caring people (taking away the black eyes such as yourself). Uninsured Americans do not have faster services, yada, yada, yada. ...... I'm afraid, BC2004, you're in for a rude awakening very soon. There will come a day when there are no bake sales and car washes to benefit sick people trying to pay medical bills.

Hmmm...I've suffered your personal attacks long enough...time to rub your nose in it. Your sob stories are just that, and quite self serving (just like me). You don't have insurance for reasons that I am not responsible for, nor are the rest of Americans to blame for your circumstances. Why have so many others figured it out without a pity pot for begging? There are people who take jobs they don't want just to get health insurance for themselves and/or family. So what is YOUR problem?

And guess what..the "well known" (so what) activist would have been just as dead in Canada.

You truly are a (insert word of choice) and not worthy of any more responses from me. Enjoy your self-centered universe.

Edited July 16, 2007 by SkyhookJackson

[jdobbin]

You are so full of it. There are many, many people of means who care a great deal about those less fortunate than themselves. Americans are, at the core, a caring people (taking away the black eyes such as yourself). Uninsured Americans do not have faster services, yada, yada, yada. Without the elusive high credit card limit they often go without. Uninsured Americans who do not qualify for Medicaid are given minimal care unless it's a life or death situation. I know that for a fact because I've lived it. On another board I frequent there was a fairly well known political activist who developed pancreatic cancer. He was uninsured. There was one surgeon at one hospital who would give him his only chance for survival. The hospital demanded $50,000 up front, cash on the barrel head. We raised the money online in about a week and he had the surgery. Sadly, since he was uninsured, he was discharged to his home on the other side of the nation prematurely, didn't receive adequate follow-up, and died. He probably would have died anyway, given the survival rate of pancreatic cancer, but an insured person wouldn't have been treated in that fashion. I'm afraid, BC2004, you're in for a rude awakening very soon. There will come a day when there are no bake sales and car washes to benefit sick people trying to pay medical bills.

Sorry to hear that story.

Canada led the research on pancreatic cancer with a new drug called erlotinib. It helped improve survival rates.

I think if the U.S. is to ever get universal care, it will start from the state level and move to the federal level.

Don't let the naysayers get you down.

[SkyhookJackson]

You are so full of it. There are many, many people of means who care a great deal about those less fortunate than themselves. Americans are, at the core, a caring people (taking away the black eyes such as yourself). Uninsured Americans do not have faster services, yada, yada, yada. ...... I'm afraid, BC2004, you're in for a rude awakening very soon. There will come a day when there are no bake sales and car washes to benefit sick people trying to pay medical bills.

Hmmm...I've suffered your personal attacks long enough...time to rub your nose in it. Your sob stories are just that, and quite self serving (just like me). You don't have insurance for reasons that I am not responsible for, nor are the rest of Americans to blame for your circumstances. Why have so many others figured it out without a pity pot for begging? There are people who take jobs they don't want just to get health insurance for themselves and/or family. So what is YOUR problem?

And guess what..the "well known" (so what) activist would have been just as dead in Canada.

You truly are a (insert word of choice) and not worthy of any more responses from me. Enjoy your self-centered universe.

Actually, BC2004, after giving it some thought, you do deserve an answer to your question as well as a big thank you for making me reflect on my lot in life for the past hour or so. Had I not sustained the orthopedic injury, which I cannot afford to have remedied, I might have done exactly as you suggest: given up what I enjoy doing for whatever job I could find that provides health insurance. Unfortunately, because of mobility issues and chronic pain, I'm now pretty much unemployable. Being 58 doesn't help, either, and if I happened to land something there's that pre-existing thing. In any case, I've managed to make a living, doing what I can do when I can do it, and it has never occurred to me - until your post - to consider doing anything else. But, you got me thinking. Maybe I should investigate SSI. It would solve my health care dilemma since you automatically go on Medicaid or Medicare. Of course, BC, that would mean you would not only be underwriting my health care, you'd be buying the groceries, too. How does that sit with you? Don't panic. It's just a thought. I'd probably qualify, but I wouldn't want to live my life on your tab. Can't you see that providing universal health care would result, overall, in a more productive populace? We aren't a bunch of lazy slugs . . . we're just not millionaires.