Gov healthcare
- Thread starter DS
- Start date
klein
Für Meno :)
Sorry, Moreluck.
Don't agree with you there. My former Fedex Roomie is a cancer survivor, so is my former girlfriends mom.
None of them went to the states.
And they don't wait for chemo or surgery, otherwise cancer would grow, and they would die.
Doesn't happen here.
In matter of fact, we got a cancer treatment center here is this city, that is up to par with the Mayo Clinic.
Even has international Specialist from the US and Europe practising thier expertise, among our great talented ones, too.
klein
Für Meno :)
I like that. 2nd spot ! But remember these are survival rates !
Every citizen got treated in every other country then the USA.
The americans without insurance did not, and died and are not part of these statistics.
Like your ghetto people, or just the unemployed that couldn't afford it.
These are stats from people going into treatment.
I'm proud to be 2nd.
Every citizen got treated in every other country then the USA.
The americans without insurance did not, and died and are not part of these statistics.
Like your ghetto people, or just the unemployed that couldn't afford it.
These are stats from people going into treatment.
I'm proud to be 2nd.
klein
Für Meno :)
Sure, now subtract the 27% of americans that have no insurance in those stats...
You would be on 2nd last spot.
Because, they can't go for treatment, and are not part of the survival success rate.
Sure, we can take out all the bums, and maybe drunken indians, that got detected far too late. But, they got treated, and didn't make it.
brett636
Well-Known Member
Even the most destitute in our country have access to the same healthcare system which earns such a high survival rate for Cancer. It is Socialized medicine which is more deadly when it comes to surviving diseases such as Cancer.
klein
Für Meno :)
Why don't you look up other stats, as to whom lives longest.
From all those countries showed... America would probably be dead end.
But, has nothing to do with healthcare. Just that you probably over eat.
And live unhealthy, that docs can't even fix.
brett636
Well-Known Member
You would be absolutely correct. There are studies that show that quality of health care has little to do with life expectancy when comparing two countries. Here are you are more likely to die in an auto accident, obesity and heart disease are more prevelent here due to life choices. I just want to know that if I get sick with a disease as serious as cancer, which most of us will probably have to deal with in our lifetime, that I can get the best care and the best treatment in the world. That kind of care can only be found in the United States.
klein
Für Meno :)
We are not far behind you, and in 2007-2008 2 major cancer clinics opened up in Edmonton and Calgary. (in this province alone), others probably too.
So, wait for the next stats to come out, and we should be on top.
And spending half then the US does, and access to everyone.
And cancer isn't just the only illness. We do better in other parts :
here is a reminder :
Has Canada Got the Cure?
by Holly Dressel
posted Aug 04, 2006
Canada outranks U.S. in healthcare report card
Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:10pm EDT
TORONTO (Reuters) - Canada outperforms the United States in health outcomes but is well behind global leaders like Japan in overall health of its population, a Canadian report released on Monday showed.
The annual report card by the Conference Board of Canada ranked Canada 10th out of 16 developed countries, with a "B" grade. The United States was the worst performer, placing 16th and earning a "D" grade.
Canada performed better on 11 indicators; such as survival rates for colorectal cancer, childhood leukemia, and kidney and liver transplants. The U.S. performed better on 6 indicators, including survival rates for breast and cervical cancer, and avoidance of childhood diseases such as pertussis and measles. It should be noted that the 21 indicators were distilled from a starting list of 1000.
Last edited:
Babagounj
Strength through joy
brett636
Well-Known Member
We are not far behind you, and in 2007-2008 2 major cancer clinics opened up in Edmonton and Calgary. (in this province alone), others probably too.
So, wait for the next stats to come out, and we should be on top.
And spending half then the US does, and access to everyone.
And cancer isn't just the only illness. We do better in other parts :
here is a reminder :
Has Canada Got the Cure?
by Holly Dressel
posted Aug 04, 2006
Canada outranks U.S. in healthcare report card
Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:10pm EDT
TORONTO (Reuters) - Canada outperforms the United States in health outcomes but is well behind global leaders like Japan in overall health of its population, a Canadian report released on Monday showed.
The annual report card by the Conference Board of Canada ranked Canada 10th out of 16 developed countries, with a "B" grade. The United States was the worst performer, placing 16th and earning a "D" grade.
Canada performed better on 11 indicators; such as survival rates for colorectal cancer, childhood leukemia, and kidney and liver transplants. The U.S. performed better on 6 indicators, including survival rates for breast and cervical cancer, and avoidance of childhood diseases such as pertussis and measles. It should be noted that the 21 indicators were distilled from a starting list of 1000.
I am not going to rehash these statistics with you. I've decided you lack the necessary mental capacity to understand what I say. Just remember that with every new cancer center, hospital, or clinic you are adding another load to your government system. The only way to pay for it is to either raise taxes, or hope the economy grows enough to sustain the cost of the new facility. Either care has to be rationed (IE waiting lines, cutoff for healthcare due to age, etc.) or your system will collapse. Government is a leech on those who produce, and as the leech grows it requires more sustenance to survive. Eventually it will kill the host if it is not reduced and or removed. Leaving the healthcare system in the hands of the producers is the only way to avoid this eventuality.
klein
Für Meno :)
Or we could re-introduce the $78 monthly fee for singles, $104.00 family.
They got rid of those fees since January 2009, because the governmnet became soo rich.
Besides, we still have a very long way to go, before we even get close to what the US spends.
And which system is collapsing?
More hospitals and clinics does not equal longer waiting lines. Actually the opposite !
But, I forgive you, it's early, you're not quite awake, yet.
And our healthcare is based on non per profit.
The big leech in the US are your insurance companies, and to an extent the Doctors, that can over charge, and your Pharma !
Everyone wants a piece of the pie.
brett636
Well-Known Member
Yikes! $104 a month for "free" healthcare? Thats more than I pay, and I don't have to wait in long lines to see a doctor.
klein
Für Meno :)
Companies paid that here, unless you were unemployed or self employed.
Here you might learn something :
January 28, 2009
Canada’s hospitals cut the paperwork, emphasize care
- How the U.S. measures up to Canada’s health care system
- The highs and lows of universal health care in Brazil
- Quality health care minus the bill in Greece
- Weighing U.S. health care against other countries
- Cuba provides free health care without the worry
- Argentina’s health care is a right, but system aches of overuse
- China seeks health care for more of its massive population
Those savings are already being realized in Canada, where basic health care is universal and, in most parts of that country, free — and where remarkably little paperwork is involved.
Last edited:
Even U.S. Insurance Companies Go Abroad for Affordable Health Care
Date: 09/09/2009
By Suzan Haskins
The four largest commercial health insurers in America and several smaller insurers are doing what thousands of regular citizens are doing – going abroad for better, more affordable health care than they can find in the U.S.
In an attempt to control costs, insurers are using networks of doctors and hospitals in India, Costa Rica, and other countries for a growing number of treatment claims. Overseas healthcare costs can be up to 80 percent less than in America, providing significant savings for the U.S. based companies – and making health care abroad particularly attractive for millions of Americans with high-deductible plans.
Jonathan Edelheit, president of the Florida-based Medical Tourism Association, said that overseas care can reduce major medical claims between 50 percent and 90 percent through price breaks of $40,000 or more for knee replacements, heart bypasses, and other procedures.
The Deloitte Center for Health Solutions projects that about 1.6 million people will travel abroad for health care in 2010 – double the approximately 750,000 Americans who traveled abroad in 2007.
With or without insurance, growing numbers of Americans are looking at medical care overseas in a variety of countries where health care standards are high and costs are low. In many of these countries it is even cost effective to pay out-of-pocket for medical care.
brett636
Well-Known Member
Ah, the free market at work. I wonder why our government can't understand that if you give the individual the power he/she will make the choices that will help our economy as a whole. If someone wants Jose or Habib to perform surgery on them then so be it. Personally I want my surgeon to be in a place where the drinking water isn't full of parasites and bacteria that can kill you.
klein
Für Meno :)
Try this then. World's best drinking water here :
Medical Tourism in Canada
Why Canada?
People traveling to Canada for medical reasons are mostly from the United States. Medical care in United States is almost double the cost of what it is in Canada, making Canada an attractive medical tourism destination for Americans.
However, those who are still skeptical about standard of care in America and Canada, should take a close look at the facts provided:
• Average in-hospital treatment costs are nearly twice as much in the U.S. ($20,673 U.S. vs. $10,373)
• There are 9.9 qualified nurses per 1000 population in Canada as compared to 7.9 nurses per 1000 population in US (so you get a highly personalized care!)
• Overall satisfaction with the surgical experience is similar in both countries (85.3% U.S. and 83.5% Canada).
• The number of acute care hospital beds in Canada is 3.0 per 1000 population as compared to 2.8 in US.
• Canadians have lower rates of in-hospital mortality (1.4% Canada vs. 2.2% U.S.).
• Administrative costs consume more of the total cost of treatment in the U.S. (38.2% of total costs in the U.S. vs. 31.7% in Canada).
• In-hospital cost of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) in the U.S. is 82.5 % higher in the U.S. than in Canada.
• The mortality rate for end-stage renal disease is 47% higher in the U.S. than in Canada. Adjusted monthly costs of treatment are $503 higher in the U.S.
• Fifty-seven percent (57%) of U.S. patients have reprocessed dialyzers used on them, compared with 0.0% of Canadian patients.
• Compared with the American counterparts, low-income Canadians have a significant survival.
• Advantage for 13 of the 15 kinds of cancer studied.
• One-year mortality rates following myocardial infarction are virtually identical for both countries (34.3% U.S. vs. 34.4% Canada).
• Canada has a higher rate of annual bone marrow transplants (0.89 per 100,000 population vs. 0.81per 100,000 in the U.S.)
• Canada has lower mortality rates for patients 65 and older three years after both low-mortality (18.52% U.S. vs. 15.31% Canada) and moderate-mortality (19.19% U.S. vs. 16.63% Canada) procedures.
• Survival rate for four disease condition is higher in Canada than in America:
o Colorectal cancer: 113 Canada vs. 108 U.S.
o Childhood leukemia: 118 vs.110
o Kidney transplants 113 vs. 100
o Liver transplants 123 vs. 102
• Above all, American citizen do not need visa if the length of stay is less than 180 days.
• The prescription drugs and medicines are far less expensive in Canada.
The high cost in America is mainly attributable to higher resource prices for products and labor and higher overhead costs resulting from a nonsocialized medical system.
In addition to the cost effective medical care, medical tourism to Canada is an opportunity to explore places of interest and relax in beautiful ambience - an opportunity worth grabbing indeed.
People from developed countries such as Canada, Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, Costa Rica, Hungary, India, Lithuania, Malaysia, Thailand, Belgium, Poland and Singapore have world class, cost-effective healthcare. Traveling to Canada for medical care just makes sense.
http://www.findprivateclinics.ca/resources/general/medical-tourism.php
Add on from wikepidea :
Some US employers have begun exploring medical travel programs as a way to cut employee health care costs. Such proposals have raised stormy debates between employers and trade unions representing workers, with one union stating that it deplored the "shocking new approach" of offering employees overseas treatment in return for a share of the company's savings. The unions also raise the issues of legal liability should something go wrong, and potential job losses in the US health care industry if treatment is outsourced.
Employers may offer incentives such as paying for air travel and waiving out-of-pocket expenses for care outside of the US. For example, in January 2008, Hannaford Bros., a supermarket chain based in Maine, began paying the entire medical bill for employees to travel to Singapore for hip and knee replacements, including travel for the patient and companion.
Last edited:
