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

[bush_cheney2004]

The Fraser is a right wing lobby group that tries to disguise itself as a research group. Much of what the Fraser Institute produces is deliberately deceptive and misleading. I have pointed out exactly why the Fraser Institute claims on this point are misleading. Furthermore, I have never said the Canadian system is perfect - I am simply saying it is much better that the mess that Americans are force to suffer with.

Of course...this response is automatic...attack the source (much hated Fraser Institute). The Fraser Institute has removed the BS comparisons between two systems with different objectives, only to reveal CHA warts.

I suspect most Americans would want universal health care system if they had a chance to learn what it really means. The health care industry in the US has done a good job spreading misinformation and fear among Americans - you are a case in point.

Maybe, but they sure as hell wouldn't use Canada as a model. If we wanted to become socialist-commies, there are much better examples available. The American system of physicians, pharms, hospitals, and insurance companies is driven by the profit motive....not very surprising for the USA, eh?

So Americans should listen to your brand of misinformation and fear, to the point of telling us how to vote in elections (another poster)? No thanks......

[Riverwind]

Of course...this response is automatic...attack the source (much hated Fraser Institute). The Fraser Institute has removed the BS comparisons between two systems with different objectives, only to reveal CHA warts.

Comparing the Canadian Health System to other Universal Healthcare Systems is reasonable. However, they presented their findings in a deliberately deceptive way. For example:

1) They claimed 'Canada spends the most on an age-adjusted basis on health care among OECD nations'

Last time I checked the US is an OECD nation so anyone who reads that statement would think that the Fraiser Institute is claiming that the Canada spends more than the US. In fact, you probably believed that until I pointed out that it was only comparing the Canadian system to OECD countries with a Universal Healthcare System.

2) They try to use this 'age-adjusted' statistic but they do not explain why that is a relevant measure. In fact, if they were intellectually honest they would have provided two figures: the age adjusted figure and the unadjusted value. They did not provide the unadjusted value because it undermines their argument. You can find the unadjusted figure in the full report here: http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin/books/...pages7-13.pdf#1

The unadjusted figure shows that Germany, Switzerland and France spend more on the Healthcare system than Canada.

I don't see how you could argue that the summary is anything other than deliberately deceptive.

Maybe, but they sure as hell wouldn't use Canada as a model.

You don't really listen do you? When has anyone said that the Americans should copy the Canada system exactly? Canadians want to reform the system and are looking elsewhere.

[bush_cheney2004]

They claimed 'Canada spends the most on an age-adjusted basis on health care among OECD nations'

Last time I checked the US is an OECD nation so anyone who reads that statement would think that the Fraiser Institute is claiming that the Canada spends more than the US. In fact, you probably believed that until I pointed out that it was only comparing the Canadian system to OECD countries with a Universal Healthcare System.

No, anyone with reading skills would understand the report's explicit purpose of removing the USA from the OECD comparison because it does not have universal access as an objective.

So among peer OECD systems, Canada comes up way short, and it certainly does not mean it is better than the USA's system, unless universal access is the goal. Most Americans will not wait for months to get services from a system that "sucks" equally. Even in Canada, those who can afford it seek a better alternative by voting with their feet and money.

[bush_cheney2004]

You don't really listen do you? When has anyone said that the Americans should copy the Canada system exactly? Canadians want to reform the system and are looking elsewhere.

No, based on this thread, many Canadians are happy to cop an attitude about how much better their system is compared to America, even when it sucks. By looking elsewhere, no doubt you mean those Canadians who practice medical tourism.

[Riverwind]

No, anyone with reading skills would understand the report's explicit purpose of removing the USA from the OECD comparison because it does not have universal access as an objective.

The statement is unambiguous: 'Although Canada spends the most on an age-adjusted basis on health care among OECD nations'. That is a false statement yet you quoted it in your post. Deliberately deceptive and misleading - jsut like the propoganda produced by the US healthcare industry.

So among peer OECD systems, Canada comes up way short, and it certainly does not mean it is better than the USA's system, unless universal access is the goal.

That is equivalent to saying a system does not have to be good if being good is not the goal. Universal access to healthcare is a fundemental principal accepted by all modern democratic states except the US. Many Americans feel the same way but have been scared by propoganda produced by the Health Care industry.

[bush_cheney2004]

That is equivalent to saying a system does not have to be good if being good is not the goal. Universal access to healthcare is a fundemental principal accepted by all modern democratic states except the US. Many Americans feel the same way but have been scared by propoganda produced by the Health Care industry.

I think this is the crux of the argument. In one breath you admit that the USA does not have such an explicit purpose, yet in the next you absolutely insist on comparing CHA performance to this nonexistent American goal.

Congratulations on achieving the goal of universal access for Canadians (mostly), but no kudos for doing so in a very expensive and unremarkable way.

We'll leave the light on for ya.

[jdobbin]

You don't really listen do you? When has anyone said that the Americans should copy the Canada system exactly? Canadians want to reform the system and are looking elsewhere.

It useless to argue with someone who argues their system is perfection and runs down everyone else's system.

I think Canadians know where some of the weaknesses are. We should be looking to the Europeans and some Asian countries as to what they do to keep universality and costs down at the same time.

[bush_cheney2004]

It useless to argue with someone who argues their system is perfection and runs down everyone else's system.

I think Canadians know where some of the weaknesses are. We should be looking to the Europeans and some Asian countries as to what they do to keep universality and costs down at the same time.

But instead they waste time and effort inflating the efficacy of the Canadian "system" by comparison, not to much better ranked systems around the world, but to the American for-profit system! Amazing.

"Running down everyone else's system" is a figment of someone's imagination, as I have demonstrated the superioity of other universal access systems. Of course, "running down" the American system is quite acceptable...LOL!

[mikedavid00]

Canadians pay about 9 per cent of GDP to insure 100 per cent of citizens; Americans expend more than 14 per cent of GDP to insure 85 per cent of the population.

People on this forum love to pull out the 'GDP' card which honestly is very useless seing as several 3rd world coutnies have higher GDP's than Canada.

Forget about GDP, let's ask: How much taxes do you peronsally pay for healtchare?

[jbg]

Ah its okay for them to critize us but heaven forbid that we should return the favour.

First, learn to spell. It's fay-vor, not, fay-vower.

Next, the problem is not that we in the US cannot take criticism. It's that the US is constantly the foil against which all things Canadian are compared, usually unfavorably to the US. It's almost reflexive. Many posters just cannot help themselves.

[jbg]

It's interesting to note that Canada ranks 13 and the U.S. is number 45 in life expectancy. Infant mortality rates are higher in the U.S. as well. That's from the Central Intelligence Agency World Facts site. Canada also fares better on the World Health Organization's ranking of health care systems, 30 over the U.S. at 37. You must be doing something right.

Even with recent immigration, Canada is still a more homogenous country. That explains the statistics you're citing.

[jdobbin]

Even with recent immigration, Canada is still a more homogenous country. That explains the statistics you're citing.

Really? Do you have a citation that states that is what the explanation is?

[jbg]

Even with recent immigration, Canada is still a more homogenous country. That explains the statistics you're citing.

Really? Do you have a citation that states that is what the explanation is?

Unfortunately and sadly, minority group life expectancies are lower in the US and infant mortality is higher. Is the same true in Canada?

[jdobbin]

Unfortunately and sadly, minority group life expectancies are lower in the US and infant mortality is higher. Is the same true in Canada?

Not that I know of. Perhaps that is because of universal care?

[jbg]

Unfortunately and sadly, minority group life expectancies are lower in the US and infant mortality is higher. Is the same true in Canada?

Not that I know of. Perhaps that is because of universal care?

Is the same true on the Reserves?

[jdobbin]

Is the same true on the Reserves?

I believe the last Statcan report showed that geography was a huge factor when it came to healthcare. It said people in cities were healthier than people living in rural areas for a variety of reasons.

[bush_cheney2004]

Unfortunately and sadly, minority group life expectancies are lower in the US.....

This in not totally true..the longest living American demographic group is Asian females.

Researchers at Harvard University's Initiative for Global Health and its School of Public Health divided the US into eight "Americas" based on factors including race, location, population density, income and homicide rates

http://health.dailynewscentral.com/content/view/0002418/42/

[Bryan]

I can't complain about the Canadian medical system at all.

I get to choose my doctor, I get to dictate my course of treament if I know enough about the situation to know what questions to ask, and I get what I want pretty much when I want it. I can get in to see my family doctor the same day every time. When I dislocated my hip, I showed up to the specialists office without an appointment, without a referral, and within an hour I had my rads done, and was discussing them with the doctor. When my son was cross-checked head first into the boards, they wanted to make sure that he got an MRI done, even though he was in no pain, and was fully mobile. He got it within a couple of hours. When my brother in law needed a liver transplant, his need was assessed, he was placed on the list in priority of his need, and he got the first one available. They even flew him out of province to the hospital best equipped to do that particular surgery.

Even elective surgeries are a lot easier than most people think. For a vasectomy, I waited a whole four days for my appointment. That was bizarre, because I EXPECTED to wait, and suddenly was getting nervous about getting snipped when they told me I could have it done so fast. I had a mole on my neck that I was concerned about because I kept cutting it shaving, and people were telling me that bas bad. I walked in just to book the appointment for the consultation, and was ushered into the examination room immediately and had it removed right then and there.

There are a lot more private options available than most people think too. Truly elective procedures (like plastic surgery) are fully private. You most certainly can pay out of pocket and go see whomever you want.

[bush_cheney2004]

Ontario bariactric surgery patients are being sent to the USA because capacity is not available for rising demand:

Sending obesity surgery patients to U.S. costly

Ontario, like most provinces is trying to handle a growing list of patients being referred for weight loss surgery. It has been handling the influx by sending hundreds of patients to the U.S. for the operation. But as CTV News has learned, the bill for these operations is growing.

The procedure was done in the U.S. and paid for by the Ontario government, because there was nowhere in Canada for her to get the surgery quickly. For that, she's grateful. But when she saw the bill, she was shocked. Government officials had estimated the cost of the procedure at US $25,000. They actually paid over US $80,000.

Ontario spent over $21 million last year to send 439 patients to the U.S. That's an average cost of about $47,800. And that is up from 2004-5, when it cost an average of about $35,000 to send each patient to the States.

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

[SkyhookJackson]

I can't complain about the Canadian medical system at all.

I get to choose my doctor, I get to dictate my course of treament if I know enough about the situation to know what questions to ask, and I get what I want pretty much when I want it. I can get in to see my family doctor the same day every time. When I dislocated my hip, I showed up to the specialists office without an appointment, without a referral, and within an hour I had my rads done, and was discussing them with the doctor. When my son was cross-checked head first into the boards, they wanted to make sure that he got an MRI done, even though he was in no pain, and was fully mobile. He got it within a couple of hours. When my brother in law needed a liver transplant, his need was assessed, he was placed on the list in priority of his need, and he got the first one available. They even flew him out of province to the hospital best equipped to do that particular surgery.

Even elective surgeries are a lot easier than most people think. For a vasectomy, I waited a whole four days for my appointment. That was bizarre, because I EXPECTED to wait, and suddenly was getting nervous about getting snipped when they told me I could have it done so fast. I had a mole on my neck that I was concerned about because I kept cutting it shaving, and people were telling me that bas bad. I walked in just to book the appointment for the consultation, and was ushered into the examination room immediately and had it removed right then and there.

There are a lot more private options available than most people think too. Truly elective procedures (like plastic surgery) are fully private. You most certainly can pay out of pocket and go see whomever you want.

Thank you for sharing your experience with the Canadian system. When I quiz Canadians about their system, the vast majority have stories such as yours. I wasn't going to relate a personal "war" story, but it seems appropriate since you've told yours. Three years ago, just a couple of months after dropping our health insurance here in the U.S. because it had gone to unaffordable, near quadruple digits each month, I suffered a gall bladder attack. I had never had one before and have never had one since. It was horrible, but the pain was unmistakable. Not wanting to put the family into overwhelming debt, I took to my bed and gobbled left over pain killers from a dental procedure. Shortly thereafter I began experiencing pain on the other side, that shot up the back: pancreatitis. Sometimes it happens after severe gallbladder attacks. Stupidly, I continued to treat myself. Finally, at the end of 2 weeks when I couldn't bear the pain any longer, I scheduled an appointment with a gastroenterologist. I had to wait 5 days. During that time, my condition began to turn around. I kept the appointment and the physician agreed with my diagnosis and was about to admit me and call a surgeon when he heard the magic words: "No insurance." The treatment suddenly changed. After a couple of cursory tests to be sure I wasn't in immediate threat of death, I was sent back home to recover. (Did I mention this condition has a 25% mortality rate, even for mild cases?) Here's where the story gets interesting. A young Canadian woman was visiting my neighbor several weeks later. I kid you not, she had the identical medical event. She was immediately taken to the local hospital and later transferred to a major medical facility an hour north of here. They contacted Canadian health authorities who made the decision that it would be more economical and just as safe for the patient if they FLEW A PRIVATE JET WITH MEDICAL STAFF TO PICK HER UP AND TAKE HER TO A CANADIAN HOSPITAL. They did and she eventually recovered completely. That's the difference between being an uninsured American and a Canadian.

[Guest American Woman]

Glancing through this thread, I've seen some really interesting posts; enough to make me curious enough to finally watch "Sicko." I'm not far into it, but already I'm guestioning some of the things that are being presented, especially in comparison to what's being said about Canadian health care here. In particular, there is a 79 year old man who has to keep working because medicaid doesn't pay for all of his medicine. From what I understand, Canada's health care doesn't pay for all of that type of thing either. If it did, why would health coverage be a benefit of some jobs? Why would Canadians need extra coverage?

Another couple had to move in with their kids because a heart attack and cancer bankrupted them. One doesn't lose their home when declaring bankruptcy, so I'm not sure how true that situation is being presented either. I know someone whose father declared bankruptcy because of heart surgery, and he's still in his home; and it's getting to the point where banks don't even consider medical bankruptcy when someone applies for a loan, so this hasn't been a problem for him.

Obviously no health coverage is a problem and I'm a huge advocate of getting national coverage, but since this thread seems to be comparing our health system to Canada's, I have to say from what I've seen that Canada's system needs a major overhauling too. Of course being uninsured myself, I'd rather have Canada's system. But when someone has really good coverage, I'd say the United States' system is superior, so I can understand why some wouldn't want to give that up.

[jdobbin]

Glancing through this thread, I've seen some really interesting posts; enough to make me curious enough to finally watch "Sicko." I'm not far into it, but already I'm guestioning some of the things that are being presented, especially in comparison to what's being said about Canadian health care here. In particular, there is a 79 year old man who has to keep working because medicaid doesn't pay for all of his medicine. From what I understand, Canada's health care doesn't pay for all of that type of thing either. If it did, why would health coverage be a benefit of some jobs? Why would Canadians need extra coverage?

Another couple had to move in with their kids because a heart attack and cancer bankrupted them. One doesn't lose their home when declaring bankruptcy, so I'm not sure how true that situation is being presented either. I know someone whose father declared bankruptcy because of heart surgery, and he's still in his home; and it's getting to the point where banks don't even consider medical bankruptcy when someone applies for a loan, so this hasn't been a problem for him.

Obviously no health coverage is a problem and I'm a huge advocate of getting national coverage, but since this thread seems to be comparing our health system to Canada's, I have to say from what I've seen that Canada's system needs a major overhauling too. Of course being uninsured myself, I'd rather have Canada's system. But when someone has really good coverage, I'd say the United States' system is superior, so I can understand why some wouldn't want to give that up.

There are a few things that are not covered by Medicare in Canada. Dental care, extra care for physio, chiro, massage thereapy, podiatrist, plastic surgery and prescriptions.

Prescriptions are covered by provincial programs but they kick in when you reach a certain threshold. People who are working and who have good plans get better coverage than those that don't have any insurance as one might expect. It can get pretty expensive for people who require a lot of medication.

Prescription costs are a major issue in Canada. Having said that, the costs are better controlled here than other jurisdictions. In these cases, it really does pay to have a good supplemental insurance program.

[ScottSA]

Ah its okay for them to critize us but heaven forbid that we should return the favour.

First, learn to spell. It's fay-vor, not, fay-vower.

Next, the problem is not that we in the US cannot take criticism. It's that the US is constantly the foil against which all things Canadian are compared, usually unfavorably to the US. It's almost reflexive. Many posters just cannot help themselves.

Ahem...the queen's English says it's "favour." I know it doesn't have the sleekness of Americanisms like "U-pick" and "hi-light," but it is after all the English spoken by the folks who taught ya'll everything ya know 'bout English, so castigating Canadians for spelling properly is bad bad behaviour.

[Guest American Woman]

There are a few things that are not covered by Medicare in Canada. Dental care, extra care for physio, chiro, massage thereapy, podiatrist, plastic surgery and prescriptions.

Prescriptions are covered by provincial programs but they kick in when you reach a certain threshold. People who are working and who have good plans get better coverage than those that don't have any insurance as one might expect. It can get pretty expensive for people who require a lot of medication.

Prescription costs are a major issue in Canada. Having said that, the costs are better controlled here than other jurisdictions. In these cases, it really does pay to have a good supplemental insurance program.

Thank you for your response.

I'd be curious to know what the 79 year old American would have to pay in comparison to a Canadian with the same affliction. I suppose that's something we'll never have an answer to.

[margrace]

There are a few things that are not covered by Medicare in Canada. Dental care, extra care for physio, chiro, massage thereapy, podiatrist, plastic surgery and prescriptions.

Prescriptions are covered by provincial programs but they kick in when you reach a certain threshold. People who are working and who have good plans get better coverage than those that don't have any insurance as one might expect. It can get pretty expensive for people who require a lot of medication.

Prescription costs are a major issue in Canada. Having said that, the costs are better controlled here than other jurisdictions. In these cases, it really does pay to have a good supplemental insurance program.

"

In Ontario there lottery site "Trillium" pays for your meds when you require expensive one. Interesting that this fact is ignored