"Because if the only way we compared the two systems was with statistics, there is a clear victor. It is becoming increasingly more difficult to dispute the fact that Canada spends less money on health care to get better outcomes. Yet, the debate rages on. Indeed, it has reached a fever pitch since President Barack Obama took office, with Americans either dreading or hoping for the dawn of a single-payer health care system. Opponents of such a system cite Canada as the best example of what not to do, while proponents laud that very same Canadian system as the answer to all of America’s health care problems. Frankly, both sides often get things wrong when trotting out Canada to further their respective arguments. As America comes to grips with the reality that changes are desperately needed within its health care infrastructure, it might prove useful to first debunk some myths about the Canadian system."
- Steven Perez
from Bookmarklet
If you also look at the UK's NHS, they spend less PUBLIC money per capita than the US too, and the general quality of healthcare is good.
- Ian May
It's an OK article, however, looking at social security, medicare, and the dozens of other entitlement programs that are near the breaking point, we need to keep government out of this in the U.S.
- Spencer
The only people against some form of universal health care in the U.S. are people who have a vested interest in continuing things the way they are. Everyone else seems to realize the way we do things now is pretty broken.
- Victor Ganata
Spencer, there's plenty of evidence that Medicare costs can be brought down significantly without harming health outcomes - see http://www.newyorker.com/reporti... . (sorry for the repeat, for anyone who's already seen it in my feed earlier.) And SS is not near the breaking point by any reasonable measure.
- Andrew C (✓)
Rene, a very interesting article. Thanks for posting.
- Ken Morley
I think the biggest problem I have with the resistance to universal health care, other than the money invested in keeping it from happening, is the assumption that, just because universal systems in other countries have flaws, we would be stupid enough to emulate those mistakes. I thought this country was built by innovators, but apparently, we're too stupid to innovate and buld a better system when it comes to our health care.
- Steven Perez
from IM
Cecily, but when you finally do need knee replacement, you'll be able to get it at no cost, right? This isn't necessarily the case in the U.S.—even if you have advanced osteoarthritis and can no longer walk, if your HMO says all you need are NSAIDs, that's all you'll get unless you're willing to pay entirely out of pocket for the surgery, assuming that your knee problems don't disqualify you from getting health coverage at all.
- Victor Ganata
Cecily, I ask this in all seriousness - if you'd rather have the bills why not come to the US and have the surgery?
- invariant
I know in theory that a Canadian physician can opt out of receiving gov't funds entirely, like how in the U.S., physicians can decline Medicaid and Medicare funds, but in practice, how often does this happen? Is it financially feasible to not accept public funding at all?
- Victor Ganata
Abby, in general I think you are correct. It seems to be accessing the system that is the problem in Canada right now. The quality of care is typically very high, however when you have to wait in Emergency for 5 hours it kind of jades your point of view on the whole system. My mother-in-law has been undergoing cancer treatment and her care has been exceptional. When my wife had both our kids the care was equally exceptional. However the wait times for test results are pathetic, and my wife spent 90% of her labour with our second child in the hall because there were no beds.
- Kenton