What's right about our health-care system
- Thread starter #juan
- Start date
That is way over the hill. It is very rare that people in Canada die because they can't get to the states for treatment. Our health care system has it's faults but is still among the best in the world.
Canada and the United States are similar in many ways, and until 40 years ago their health care systems were nearly identical. At that time Canada adopted a national insurance program (medicare). Simultaneously, the United States implemented its Medicare program for elderly people.
Although both nations continue to rely largely on private funding for drugs, they now differ substantially in both the financing and delivery of physician and hospital services.1 With respect to financing, Canada has virtually first-dollar, universal public coverage of hospital and physician services. With respect to delivery, not-for-profit institutions provide almost all hospital services, and large for-profit organizations are almost entirely excluded from the provision of physician services. In contrast, the United States relies on a mixture of public and private insurance to finance health care, and leaves 16% of the population without coverage. Investor-owned for-profit providers play a substantial role.
The United States also spends far more on health care, i.e., approximately 15% of its gross domestic product versus about 10% in Canada. In 2003, Americans spent an estimated US$5,635 per capita on health care, while Canadians spent US$3,003.
How do these alternative approaches to health care financing and delivery affect health outcomes? Although a number of factors beyond the health care system influence the health of populations, for conditions amenable to medical treatment the health care system is a major determinant of outcomes.2,3 The choices the United States and Canada have made may influence access and quality of care, and hence morbidity and mortality. To inform debate on this issue we undertook a systematic review addressing the following question: Are there differences in health outcomes (mortality or morbidity) in patients suffering from similar medical conditions treated in Canada versus those treated in the United States?
http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/view/8/1
What was the point of this study - it was interesting but I wonder if Canada is again using the U.S.A. as a comparative rather than many other nations in the western world they have access to information from.... why the U.S. only?
The figures of cost per individual is relatively sketchy as to whether costs are higher in the U.S.
Americans generally have higher salaries and many have health insurance costs built into their jobs or belong to health insurance groups which have policies for sale under individual group plans...so what is the point of 'cost per individual'? Unless these issues are factored in it is impossible to judge say ten individuals and their annual cost of medical care from Canada vs. ten from the U.S. There are variants which affect the percentages in so many ways I don't understand how they can be grouped under one dollar figure per individual.
Back to the reason for the report. If Canadian Health Care is the best - outpacing the U.S. system in so many ways - why the need for a study at all? Confirmation? I thought it was a slam dunk opinion already been decided and advertised.
The figures of cost per individual is relatively sketchy as to whether costs are higher in the U.S.
Americans generally have higher salaries and many have health insurance costs built into their jobs or belong to health insurance groups which have policies for sale under individual group plans...so what is the point of 'cost per individual'? Unless these issues are factored in it is impossible to judge say ten individuals and their annual cost of medical care from Canada vs. ten from the U.S. There are variants which affect the percentages in so many ways I don't understand how they can be grouped under one dollar figure per individual.
Back to the reason for the report. If Canadian Health Care is the best - outpacing the U.S. system in so many ways - why the need for a study at all? Confirmation? I thought it was a slam dunk opinion already been decided and advertised.
Last edited:
It is a slam dunk. Maybe the study will counteract those who run off at the mouth without knowing what they are talking about.. There is no one American system. There are a dozen, some better than others, some worse. Canada's health act makes sure everyone is covered. There are some differences among the provinces but the differences are minor. People are not driven to bankruptcy by medical bills in this country. Canada's health care system costs Canadians just over half what Americans pay per capita. Nuff said.
Maybe not exactly on the topic but it's an interesting factor developing.
Jul 12, 2007 04:30 AM
Greg Jorgensen
Special to the Star
BANGKOK, Thailand–They say a few weeks in the tropics does wonders for a person's constitution; most come back with a slight increase in energy, a healthy tan and a few less wrinkles.
But if your co-worker comes back from vacation with a new head of hair, a larger bust or minus that pesky heart condition that made them wheeze on the way to the water cooler, they've most likely taken advantage of what is emerging as a booming global trend – medical tourism (MT).
Ten years ago, going overseas specifically for medical care was nearly unheard of; last year, more than 1.3 million patients were treated in Asia alone, a rate that continues to grow at about 30 per cent a year. Business has been booming in India, Thailand, Singapore and even up-and-coming medical tourism destinations such as South Korea and the Philippines and shows no signs of letting up.
There are several reasons why medical tourism is such an attractive alternative, but cost is undoubtedly right up there – generally about one-tenth of what you'd pay at home. When you're on the wrong end of an expensive medical procedure – including cosmetic – that's a lot of money.
Popular media likes to spin medical tourism as essentially a quick surgery followed by a week on a beach sipping Mai-Tais, which is a bit more romantic than the reality.
"Actually," says Curtis Schroeder, group CEO of Bumrungrad International, "it's much less glamourous. You can't actually play in the sand or go scuba diving, for obvious medical reasons. But most of our patients still take full advantage of the air-con shopping malls, golf courses, food and culture."
Schroeder should know. Bangkok's Bumrungrad Hospital has been a press darling of late, capturing headlines in health, tourism and news publications around the world, with the investigative TV newsmagazine 60 Minutes calling it the "No. 1 international hospital in the world."
It's a reputation that the hospital has worked hard for.
"We were the first hospital in the world to be ISO 9001:2000 certified to European standards, which we then followed with accreditation under new Thai governmental regulations based on Canadian health care standards," Schroeder explains.
"Lastly, we were certified by the Joint Commission International, whose parent company is responsible for accrediting most hospitals in the U.S.
"Let me tell you," laughs Schroeder, "it was exhausting and very thorough. They had people here for a week interviewing patients, doctors, and staff, and going over every square inch of the place. The medical community was shocked that a Thai hospital was the first in Asia to get their accreditation."
Several hospitals have since followed suit, but Bumrungrad works hard to remain at the fore, with more than 20 offices around the globe. It serves more than one million patients every year, 8,000 of whom come from Canada.
Bumrungrad's reputation is well known locally, as well. When Richie Moore, an American expat living in Bangkok, was in a motorcycle accident with a tanker truck last year, he knew he had to head to Bumrungrad.
"I broke my right elbow, forearm, hip, and shattered my pelvis in six places, landing about 15 metres from my bike. I demanded that they take me to Bumrungrad, where my pain and anxiety quickly faded."
The care he received there sticks with him today. "I had four doctors and a fantastic orthopedic surgeon," he says. "I was on my back for three weeks and finally went home after I learned to sit, stand and begin to walk with a modified set of crutches. Total bill after 25 days in a personal room, two surgeries and physical therapy was $16,000 (Cdn.).
But if the shiny brochures and flashing Internet ads do promise sun, sand and surgery, can you trust them? What makes one hospital better than another? What can you do if something goes wrong?
One man who is trying to help answer these questions is Austin Brentley, a Bangkok-based American who has launched healthmedicaltourism.org, which aims to offer no-nonsense advice for those seeking medical care overseas.
"We want to be the Google of the medical tourism market," he says.
Brentley, a Harvard grad and world traveller several times over, found the impetus for his site when he went under the knife in Thailand. "I had lumbar surgery last fall and was so impressed with the care I received that I started to do some research. I found there was an unmet demand for a central repository of solid data, which was scattered and hard to find," he explains. "Our job is to gather all of this information together so users can decide whether MT is right for them."
Besides cost, some of the factors that give Asian medical tourism a bit more polish are the hospitality inherent to Asian cultures, and short wait times. "In my case, it was five days between my first visit and my surgery," marvels Brentley. "That's unheard of in most western countries." Schroeder echoes this comment.
"In the U.K. or North America, the average waiting time to see an oncologist is six months after you've been diagnosed with cancer. After hearing that, does it matter if it's free? No, I have a lump in my throat and I need to have it looked at. These are often life-and-death decisions."
In Asia, the average tourist spends about $152 (Cdn.) per day, while a medical tourist spends about $383 a day, a huge potential market for any country. In the U.S., several of South Carolina's massive BlueCross insurers have teamed up to offer Bumrungrad and other Asian hospitals as options to its 1.3 million members. Even corporations are beginning to take note.
"At a recent medical seminar I spoke at, some of the most interested people I talked to represented huge multinational U.S. companies," says Schroeder.
Clearly, the potential is massive. As the huge and economically vital baby-boomer generation slowly but surely continues to age, interest remains high.
After the 60 Minutes program, Bumrungrad received more than 13,000 emails requesting more information. Brentley adds, "When the Google ranking for HealthMedicalTourism.org rose to No. 1 or 2 for several days, we had to immediately upgrade our server to handle the extra traffic. It caused an incredible spike in viewers."
Naturally, travelling around the world for an operation continues to cause hesitation in many.
"It is a large leap of faith for anyone to consider overseas health care," says Schroeder. "But what many people find is that the service and care are arguably better than any you can get back home," to western countries.
He laughs again. "We actually have a lot more trouble keeping our Thai patients happy than we do with our expat patients."
Schroeder predicts that medical tourism to Asia could easily quintuple over the next five years.
Jul 12, 2007 04:30 AM
Greg Jorgensen
Special to the Star
BANGKOK, Thailand–They say a few weeks in the tropics does wonders for a person's constitution; most come back with a slight increase in energy, a healthy tan and a few less wrinkles.
But if your co-worker comes back from vacation with a new head of hair, a larger bust or minus that pesky heart condition that made them wheeze on the way to the water cooler, they've most likely taken advantage of what is emerging as a booming global trend – medical tourism (MT).
Ten years ago, going overseas specifically for medical care was nearly unheard of; last year, more than 1.3 million patients were treated in Asia alone, a rate that continues to grow at about 30 per cent a year. Business has been booming in India, Thailand, Singapore and even up-and-coming medical tourism destinations such as South Korea and the Philippines and shows no signs of letting up.
There are several reasons why medical tourism is such an attractive alternative, but cost is undoubtedly right up there – generally about one-tenth of what you'd pay at home. When you're on the wrong end of an expensive medical procedure – including cosmetic – that's a lot of money.
Popular media likes to spin medical tourism as essentially a quick surgery followed by a week on a beach sipping Mai-Tais, which is a bit more romantic than the reality.
"Actually," says Curtis Schroeder, group CEO of Bumrungrad International, "it's much less glamourous. You can't actually play in the sand or go scuba diving, for obvious medical reasons. But most of our patients still take full advantage of the air-con shopping malls, golf courses, food and culture."
Schroeder should know. Bangkok's Bumrungrad Hospital has been a press darling of late, capturing headlines in health, tourism and news publications around the world, with the investigative TV newsmagazine 60 Minutes calling it the "No. 1 international hospital in the world."
It's a reputation that the hospital has worked hard for.
"We were the first hospital in the world to be ISO 9001:2000 certified to European standards, which we then followed with accreditation under new Thai governmental regulations based on Canadian health care standards," Schroeder explains.
"Lastly, we were certified by the Joint Commission International, whose parent company is responsible for accrediting most hospitals in the U.S.
"Let me tell you," laughs Schroeder, "it was exhausting and very thorough. They had people here for a week interviewing patients, doctors, and staff, and going over every square inch of the place. The medical community was shocked that a Thai hospital was the first in Asia to get their accreditation."
Several hospitals have since followed suit, but Bumrungrad works hard to remain at the fore, with more than 20 offices around the globe. It serves more than one million patients every year, 8,000 of whom come from Canada.
Bumrungrad's reputation is well known locally, as well. When Richie Moore, an American expat living in Bangkok, was in a motorcycle accident with a tanker truck last year, he knew he had to head to Bumrungrad.
"I broke my right elbow, forearm, hip, and shattered my pelvis in six places, landing about 15 metres from my bike. I demanded that they take me to Bumrungrad, where my pain and anxiety quickly faded."
The care he received there sticks with him today. "I had four doctors and a fantastic orthopedic surgeon," he says. "I was on my back for three weeks and finally went home after I learned to sit, stand and begin to walk with a modified set of crutches. Total bill after 25 days in a personal room, two surgeries and physical therapy was $16,000 (Cdn.).
But if the shiny brochures and flashing Internet ads do promise sun, sand and surgery, can you trust them? What makes one hospital better than another? What can you do if something goes wrong?
One man who is trying to help answer these questions is Austin Brentley, a Bangkok-based American who has launched healthmedicaltourism.org, which aims to offer no-nonsense advice for those seeking medical care overseas.
"We want to be the Google of the medical tourism market," he says.
Brentley, a Harvard grad and world traveller several times over, found the impetus for his site when he went under the knife in Thailand. "I had lumbar surgery last fall and was so impressed with the care I received that I started to do some research. I found there was an unmet demand for a central repository of solid data, which was scattered and hard to find," he explains. "Our job is to gather all of this information together so users can decide whether MT is right for them."
Besides cost, some of the factors that give Asian medical tourism a bit more polish are the hospitality inherent to Asian cultures, and short wait times. "In my case, it was five days between my first visit and my surgery," marvels Brentley. "That's unheard of in most western countries." Schroeder echoes this comment.
"In the U.K. or North America, the average waiting time to see an oncologist is six months after you've been diagnosed with cancer. After hearing that, does it matter if it's free? No, I have a lump in my throat and I need to have it looked at. These are often life-and-death decisions."
In Asia, the average tourist spends about $152 (Cdn.) per day, while a medical tourist spends about $383 a day, a huge potential market for any country. In the U.S., several of South Carolina's massive BlueCross insurers have teamed up to offer Bumrungrad and other Asian hospitals as options to its 1.3 million members. Even corporations are beginning to take note.
"At a recent medical seminar I spoke at, some of the most interested people I talked to represented huge multinational U.S. companies," says Schroeder.
Clearly, the potential is massive. As the huge and economically vital baby-boomer generation slowly but surely continues to age, interest remains high.
After the 60 Minutes program, Bumrungrad received more than 13,000 emails requesting more information. Brentley adds, "When the Google ranking for HealthMedicalTourism.org rose to No. 1 or 2 for several days, we had to immediately upgrade our server to handle the extra traffic. It caused an incredible spike in viewers."
Naturally, travelling around the world for an operation continues to cause hesitation in many.
"It is a large leap of faith for anyone to consider overseas health care," says Schroeder. "But what many people find is that the service and care are arguably better than any you can get back home," to western countries.
He laughs again. "We actually have a lot more trouble keeping our Thai patients happy than we do with our expat patients."
Schroeder predicts that medical tourism to Asia could easily quintuple over the next five years.
Maybe a little bit of bigotry to overcome here but Bankok is not the first place I would likely choose to go and have surgery. This is an interesting concept and the prices are unquestionably a lot lower. That alone will go along way to make it succeed.
I think the point is to determine if that type of system is efficient or if we could afford it in Canada. Politicians talk about the Canadian system being unsustainable, so it only stands to reason we would be looking at other systems. When people advocate a more American style system as being a solution to our health care spending, the logical next step is to see if it is in fact cheaper overall.
What, that he was Canadian and didn't think about buying US health insurance, which is illegal in Canada, and thus wouldn't be able to pay the cost of his cancer care? :-?
You're stretching, Tracy.
Anyways
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11826524
Maybe you didn't read the whole thread, so here's a rundown: Another poster said that most cancer patients mortgage their homes to go to the US and seek treatment. I said they didn't, they get treated in Canada. You said your grandpa didn't go to the US and seek treatment, he got treated in Canada. I don't see how that proves me wrong.
Yes, I get that he had to wait two months after his residency requirement was met. He put up with the wait time rather than going to the US and seeking treatment. Yes, cost is the issue that stops Canadians from going to the US. It's sometimes even the reason Canadians go home for treatment. I know one nurse down here who moved back to Canada (yes she had insurance down here, still couldn't afford the treatment). My roomate recently went back to England for ovarian cancer surgery as well (she had no insurance as she was between jobs and couldn't afford cobra). Cost is a BIG issue in health care. It would be great if we had unlimited resources. We don't. No country does.
Last edited:
I said most in Ontario. Maybe that was an exaggeration, but MANY MANY in both Ontario and Quebec DO go to NY for care because the waiting lists put thier lives in jeopardy.
ETA These provinces also pay for treatment of Canadians in the US as funding becomes available. Best of both worlds.
Last edited:
Run for your lives! The big bad US health care system is out to consume the livelihood of the proletariats in Canada!
This is argument is pathetic. You CANNOT compare US with Canada because the delivery systems are VASTLY different.
Let's compare two socialized systems, eh?
Canada and Greece? Why Greece? Because it's a TRULY UNIVERSAL health care system which includes eye care, hospice, dentist, you name it, they COVER it! And here's a the big kicker, the Greek Economy is nowhere what Canada's is.
They have a PARALLEL system (public and private) of health care delivery.
Your system compared to other "socialized" health care systems S U C K S. Ya, it sucks! You're at the bottom of the barrel compared to other Western health care systems that implement public delivery.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and more thing, this is PRECISELY why your health care system will almost ALWAYS suck. YOur constant comparisons with the US in some cases place you a little higher and make you all feel all cozy and warm that you're BETTER than the US. Aslong as you can convince yourselves of that, you'll never sprain a muscle improving yourselves.
This is argument is pathetic. You CANNOT compare US with Canada because the delivery systems are VASTLY different.
Let's compare two socialized systems, eh?
Canada and Greece? Why Greece? Because it's a TRULY UNIVERSAL health care system which includes eye care, hospice, dentist, you name it, they COVER it! And here's a the big kicker, the Greek Economy is nowhere what Canada's is.
They have a PARALLEL system (public and private) of health care delivery.
Your system compared to other "socialized" health care systems S U C K S. Ya, it sucks! You're at the bottom of the barrel compared to other Western health care systems that implement public delivery.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and more thing, this is PRECISELY why your health care system will almost ALWAYS suck. YOur constant comparisons with the US in some cases place you a little higher and make you all feel all cozy and warm that you're BETTER than the US. Aslong as you can convince yourselves of that, you'll never sprain a muscle improving yourselves.
Well, I would disagree with that. I do know people in Canada who have received excellent treatment for cancer.
My father has to wait months to see a neurologist on Vancouver Island though.
Absolute bull$hit!
I could care less what kind of system you have in the U.S. ITN. I'm happy with what we have....sure, it has flaws but it can be improved. If our system sucks, yours must really suck because it costs twice as much. We can spend another thirty or forty percent and still pay less than you do Come again when you can't stay so long..
And where is the logic in THAT statement?
Perhaps I should have said," If our system sucks, yours must really suck because it costs twice as much for less coverage"........But then. you already knew that.......
I know you're happy with what you have, and I'm quite happy with what I have; access to the best doctors, hospitals and medical technology within a ten minute drive. Sure I pay for it, I value my health and would pay more for it if I had to.
Now you can be concerned about what costs more and what not in your world. I don't put a price tag on my or my families health, but you, by all means, knock yourself out.
In the meantime Canada ranks 30th (last time I checked) and poor little Greece ranks 14th with a REAL universal health care system.
Throughout this thread you have been consistent in mentioning this isn't about the US health care, it's about Canadas. Perhaps you should call the author then, because as usual, when mentioning health care, you point to the south, because should anyone DARE to point anywhere else, you will tuck your tail between your legs and start to whine.
When you begin to realize you have major flaws in your health care system, only then will you make it bigger and better. But noooooo, as long as you're a tad better than the US, you're content,w hich makes this entire conversation rather pathetic.
Have a good night. :smile:
Yes, waitlists are a problem especially for specialists. Canadian doctors are much more likely to choose general practice than in some other countries so we have fewer specialists. Non-lifethreatening conditions often have to wait. My mom waited a long time to see an orthopedic surgeon for foot surgery. It wasn't a big deal for her though because it didn't affect her quality of life or anything. For all the hoopla people make about waitlists, our patient outcomes aren't any worse than anywhere else. Those waiting are inconvenienced, but they aren't killed by it.