Physicist Stephen Hawking tells US to stop attacking British health service

[Niflmir]

The best that ANYONE can do concerning their own healthcare is to improve on it. We are of the opinion that as good as the WHO says Canadian healthcare is, it can always be better. It's become apparent to me that if we want the same quality of healthcare as other Canadians, we should move to a major center where the hospitals are pampered by gov't, and leave the outlying areas with their first aid stations. We won't. We are pretty healthy. But we can't say the same for other people in rural areas who DO need decent healthcare and can't get it.
Whether people like it or not, we do have a multitiered healthcare system.

I think this is based largely on logistics.

You have people who will travel hours to shop in the cities because there is not as much selection in their town. Which of course puts pressure on the town to downsize its shopping industry. The same happens with cities. People flock there for services and they wind up with more of it than corresponds to their population base.

This is ignoring things like specialisation, which simply cannot survive in a small town.

As a computational physicist, I will never be able to find a career in my home town. Sad, but true.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

It's become apparent to me that if we want the same quality of healthcare as other Canadians, we should move to a major center where the hospitals are pampered by gov't, and leave the outlying areas with their first aid stations. We won't. We are pretty healthy. But we can't say the same for other people in rural areas who DO need decent healthcare and can't get it.

That is the problem with almost every country Anna, the access usually is not good in rural, remote areas.

When I lived in USA (in the 70s), we had a doctor friend there (because of my wife, I have been on friendly terms with doctors for a long time now). We were living in Salt Lake City, Utah. He got called out to a remote place in Wyoming. They chartered a plane for him to fly from Salt Lake city to go and see the patient.

But you cannot do that kind of thing often, it becomes expensive. Access in rural areas is always the problem, in any country.

 

[AnnaG]

I think this is based largely on logistics.

You have people who will travel hours to shop in the cities because there is not as much selection in their town. Which of course puts pressure on the town to downsize its shopping industry. The same happens with cities. People flock there for services and they wind up with more of it than corresponds to their population base.

This is ignoring things like specialisation, which simply cannot survive in a small town.

As a computational physicist, I will never be able to find a career in my home town. Sad, but true.

I agree. Les is a HD mechanic so as long as there is heavy machinery around that needs fixing, he can find work. If not, he can also fix autos, lawnmowers, and chainsaws. We don't need that much crap from town and are pretty self sufficient. Most of what we don't have we can get from neighbors. Too bad our civilisation isn't like that. We made a mess of the planet, created more and more ways for relatively few people to have waaaaaaaaaaaaay more than they could ever use and don't like sharing their excess with people who don't have enough, etc. Cities seem to be a dehumanising and cyclical phenomenon. Almost closed systems, except they need food that rural people grow. Homo sapiens is the saddest excuse (and funniest) form of life around. Gotta love em, though, to put it in Les's terms.

 

[AnnaG]

It's become apparent to me that if we want the same quality of healthcare as other Canadians, we should move to a major center where the hospitals are pampered by gov't, and leave the outlying areas with their first aid stations. We won't. We are pretty healthy. But we can't say the same for other people in rural areas who DO need decent healthcare and can't get it.

That is the problem with almost every country Anna, the access usually is not good in rural, remote areas.

When I lived in USA (in the 70s), we had a doctor friend there (because of my wife, I have been on friendly terms with doctors for a long time now). We were living in Salt Lake City, Utah. He got called out to a remote place in Wyoming. They chartered a plane for him to fly from Salt Lake city to go and see the patient.

But you cannot do that kind of thing often, it becomes expensive. Access in rural areas is always the problem, in any country.

BS. It's a simple fact that doctors prefer cities. That is a solvable problem. Doctors here are overloaded with patients and there are people that don't have a family physician. They use those walkin clinics. So much for decent healthcare when your doctor isn't familiar with your medical history. It's fine if you need a scan or something and can scoot to a town 2 hours away. But if you fall and rupture a spleen or something and the only one that can fix you is 2 hours away but people can't diagnose you first to see if you need to go to that someone 2 hours away, you are toast, bub.
So as mentioned before, healthcare in Canada is fine, but only if you live in a city. That's hardly what I would call a good situation.

 

[Unforgiven]

It's become apparent to me that if we want the same quality of healthcare as other Canadians, we should move to a major center where the hospitals are pampered by gov't, and leave the outlying areas with their first aid stations. We won't. We are pretty healthy. But we can't say the same for other people in rural areas who DO need decent healthcare and can't get it.

Yeah if you want the services that are finite then you need to access it in a major centre. That is cost effective.

Whether people like it or not, we do have a multitiered healthcare system. And perhaps it is appropriate that the generally unhealthy city dwellers have relatively immediate access to healthcare and we rural types have to wait or travel hours to get it. City people need it more.

There are more city people to use it. Not that they need it more or less than you. If you choose to live in a remote or sparsly populated area, that's your choice. But no one has to foot the bill for you to have a hospital a few blocks away that sits empty waiting for you to get sick and use it while others who do need it right now go without. That's just stupid. Feel free to live int he sticks but don't bitch about the drive.

 

[Cliffy]

Cities are urban concentration camps for slaves of the system, soon to become Soilent Green.

 

[Cliffy]

The medical system is anything but cost effective. It is a self perpetrating profit machine dedicated to the betterment of big Pharma and the Medical Mafia.

 

[DaSleeper]

So far I've never had a problem with emergency health care in Canada.....Twice I had to get detached retina surgery and both times I was seen promptly by a specialist in Toronto and operated upon successfully....

 

[AnnaG]

Yeah if you want the services that are finite then you need to access it in a major centre. That is cost effective.



There are more city people to use it. Not that they need it more or less than you. If you choose to live in a remote or sparsly populated area, that's your choice. But no one has to foot the bill for you to have a hospital a few blocks away that sits empty waiting for you to get sick and use it while others who do need it right now go without. That's just stupid. Feel free to live int he sticks but don't bitch about the drive.

Get a grip. Lots of people don't have a choice about where to live. Their career is usually the deciding factor. For us, we simply find it healthier to live away from those stinking, over-populated stresspits.
Besides, the biggest problem is getting doctors out here. It isn't a matter of having a shiny hospital with all kinds of nifty gadgets. Can't you read?

 

[Nuggler]

Most Canadians are happy with their health care. I am too. What else matters? I've had open hear surgery and a few other procedures with narry a hitch and quick service. I can't think of a reason to complain.

Is your hearing better now??;-)

 

[AnnaG]

lol open hear surgery. How very observant of you, Nuggler. lol
Anyway, i guess seeing as how everyone is happy with Canada's healthcare, it has no room for improvement.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Doctors here are overloaded with patients and there are people that don't have a family physician. They use those walkin clinics.

Doctors are overloaded everywhere, Anna, not just in rural areas. In Ontario there is a shortage of Family doctors almost everywhere. 15 or 20 years ago the shortage was restricted to mostly rural areas. The Golden Horseshoe (the area between Toronto and Niagara) has plenty of doctors. But the situation has changed dramatically in the past 10 to 15 years, many old doctors have retired and new Family Physicians have not taken their place.

In Ontario, any Family Physician could set up practice almost anywhere and have more than enough patients in about six months. My wife’s practice was full after six months, she stopped taking new patients. She hasn’t opened up her practice for years, now she only takes new patients if they are relatives of existing patients (and even then not always).

So as mentioned before, healthcare in Canada is fine, but only if you live in a city. That's hardly what I would call a good situation.

Again, that is the situation in most countries; Canada is not unique in that respect.

 

[Unforgiven]

Anyway, i guess seeing as how everyone is happy with Canada's healthcare, it has no room for improvement.

Oh there is always room for improvement but there is no pleasing some people.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

So far I've never had a problem with emergency health care in Canada.....Twice I had to get detached retina surgery and both times I was seen promptly by a specialist in Toronto and operated upon successfully....

Detached retina is serious business, DaSleeper; they better operate on you promptly. If they don’t it can result in blindness, and that can result in a substantial lawsuit.

 

[Machjo]

I would like to read some of these alleged legitimate arguments against socialized health care.

Individual responsibilty for one's health is one such argument. Why should the teetotaller pay for the drinker's liver?

There are also a legitimate arguments in favour of medicare too, such as why should the smoker not pay for his non-smoking friends' and family-members' lung cancer treatment?

There are legitimate arguments in both camps, and probably a two-tiered system could address most of the concerns on both sides of the discussion:

Two-tier health care - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I find the Singaporean model particularly attractive:

Health care in Singapore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ranked sixth in the world.

According to the World Health Organization in 2000:

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems

France's is ranked the best:

Health in France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Both France's and Singapores are two-tier systems, though granted so is Canada's to a certain degree.

There are arguments for and against the two extremes, but a two-tier system is likely the one most capable of answering the concerns of both sides of the debate.

 

[Machjo]

There are no arguments against covering every citizen, Machjo, that is what socialized health care is all about. In all developed countries except USA, government makes sure that everybody is covered.

USA lags behind all the socialized health care countries in terms of most health indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality etc. And USA spends much more on health care than any other country.

Proof of the pudding is in the eating, socialized health care works, fully private, Devil take the hindmost health care doesn’t,

But there are arguements between pure medicare and two-tier. The best systems in the world are two-tier according to the WHO (see links above).

 

[Machjo]

Well, there are some pretty good arguments as to why you cannot plain out outlaw private health care. I think many people think instituting a public healthcare system would mean outlawing private healthcare, and this need not be true and in fact needs to be not true.

And this is where the NDP could learn from its European counterparts and Singapore.

 

[AnnaG]

You get a grip. Anyone can live anywhere they want in Canada. Doctors know that whiny hicks in the scrubs won't do what they're told anyway so what's the point?

Tell that to the computational physicist. Do you have any evidence of that ASSumption? Or are you just grabbing at whatever straws you can?

Stick to you scrub brush shanty and keep your busybody know it all attitude. No one wants you living near them anyway. :lol: It probably saves you from getting punched in the mouth all the time and having to see a doctor who as you have pointed out, doesn't want to see you. Or those smelly hillbilly folk you ride in on. :snorting:

lol Sorry, but you can't bait me anymore either. And that was a pathetic attempt.

 

[Machjo]

Outlawing private health care would be a mistake, failure to regulate religiously would be worse.

8O Did you really type that?8O

Are you feeling OK?8O
:lol:

 

[Machjo]

Regarding ignorance of Americans, here is something that will crack you up. I was just watching the show ‘Who wants to become a millionaire’.

In that the 8000 $ question was, what is the name of Obama’s daughters. Now, I would think any school kid in USA knows it (or at least should know it). I knew the names as soon as Obama became the front runner.

Anyway, the contestant didn’t know it, she phoned a friend. The friend was quite confident of the answer she told her it was A. The contestant went with that, and she told the wrong answer, she was out.

I forget Obama's daughters' names too, but then again, it is his private life, isn't it?