of course, I could be wrong...: madpriest's thought for the day

Monday, July 13, 2009

madpriest's thought for the day

Regarding the different advantages of
the U.S. and U.K. healthcare systems:

I would rather die from equality
than die from inequality.

19 comments:

themethatisme said...: Nothing more equalising than death.; 13 July, 2009 17:54
Mary Clara said...: You have nailed it in one sentence, MP.; 13 July, 2009 18:04
Ellie Finlay said...: Mary Clara has it right. You have nailed it indeed.; 13 July, 2009 18:12
Brad said...: This is a distinction without a difference.; 13 July, 2009 18:29
Jim Pratt said...: From the perspective of an American living in Canada, I'm not sure which is better.

The problem with the Canadian system is that equality is only skin deep; scratch the surface and you find lots of inequality (and people dying from that inequality).

Rural areas (like my former parish in Newfoundland) suffer from a lack of medical professionals, doctors who speak limited English (often practicing with provisional licenses because they are unable to pass the Canadian licensing exams, but are allowed to practice because of the shortage of doctors), exorbitant travel costs to see a specialist (which, if they are eligible for reimbursement, may not be reimbursed for months).

Even in urban areas, access to health care depends often more on your status than on equality. Thousands of people lack a primary care physician and must rely on hospital emergency rooms. I myself have a primary care physician only because I have several doctors in my parish who could help me get in via the back door.

Except in Quebec, there is no universal pharmacare; unless you can qualify for a provincial pharmacy card or have private drug insurance, you are on your own.

In many areas, outpatient psychiatric care is available only to those who have private insurance or are willing to pay for it, because it's not covered under medicare.

Then there's a problem with portability: because health care is a provincial rather than federal responsibility, eligibility standards vary, and people very often fall between the cracks when they move from one province to another. For instance, in Quebec, if you don't apply for a health insurance card before the last day of the month in which you move to Quebec, you will be without coverage for a time, because generally your former province's plan will cover you for 90 days after you move away, and Quebec will not cover you until 90 days after you apply (and before you apply, you have to have 3 pieces of identification or utility bills with your Quebec address).

Unfortunately in the Canadian system, a lot of people are still dying from inequality.; 13 July, 2009 20:00
MadPriest said...: Thanks for that, Jim.
And so that would make the Brits what exactly?
Oh yes, I know ....... THE WINNERS!!!!!!
And before you start - it won't hurt you to let us be the best at something.; 13 July, 2009 20:44
Counterlight said...: No one said anything about the French system yet (damn pansy frogs and their national holiday tomorrow!).

A friend of mine, fully insured, fell off of his bike and broke his arm here in New York. He waited 2 hours in an emergency room, was rudely treated, and still had to pay a high copay for the visit and the medication.

That same friend came down with kidney stones in Paris. He was put on painkillers immediately and treated in half an hour. The staff was kind, even though he could speak no French. He received ample follow up treatment and medications. Total cost, $100. If he had been a French citizen, it would have been free.

The French spend about half per capita of what we spend per capita on health care.

How 'bout a wry Gallic grin?; 13 July, 2009 21:03
Erika Baker said...: The German system is pretty brilliant too. You don;t have to wait months for a referal to a specialist, you can refer yourself. Even the most basic insurance gives you 5 specialist self referal a year.

There are very very few private hospitals, but all hospitals have private wings, so everyone gets treated by the same medical team, and the private fees cross subsidise the standard care.; 13 July, 2009 22:15
Anonymous said...: This post has been removed by a blog administrator.; 13 July, 2009 22:40
Anonymous said...: This post has been removed by a blog administrator.; 13 July, 2009 23:09
MadPriest said...: I have no conscience, troll. My morality is based on logic. So you are wasting your time.; 13 July, 2009 23:11
Jim said...: What I read of the German system is pretty positive. Canada not so much. In fact one of the things going for Canada is proximity to the US so that things that are going to take months or simply not happen are accessible via holiday trips South.

What is clear is that the US system is not working for way too many Americans. We need to fix it and I fear the politics are such that we wont. ;;sigh;;

FWIW
jimB; 13 July, 2009 23:13
Anonymous said...: This post has been removed by a blog administrator.; 13 July, 2009 23:20
MadPriest said...: I have no conscience because I am mad.
I wish I had the emotions you accuse me of.
And I enjoy playing you.
Again because I am mad and you have placed yourself outside of the people I have to deal logically with.
You understand. Because you too are mad.; 13 July, 2009 23:24
Anonymous said...: This post has been removed by a blog administrator.; 13 July, 2009 23:57
MadPriest said...: Yes. I have admitted that many times.

I take down your comments because not everyone around here is mad and some of them don't understand. They think they can cure you. But you don't want to be cured. You want to dance. Sometimes I enjoy dancing with you. Sometimes you bore me. Today has been a good day for you.; 14 July, 2009 00:04
Trixie Royale said...: This post has been removed by a blog administrator.; 14 July, 2009 00:24
NancyP said...: The French may win the prize here, for best overall health outcomes in a socially / ethnically heterogeneous society more comparable to the USA than those of the Scandinavian countries.

There is a certain irreducible minimum inequality of health outcome that is associated with income inequality and social inequality (including racism). The object is to reduce the inequality at reasonable cost. Some of the strategies may involve direct intervention in the health care system. Some other strategies may be indirect: increased neighborhood safety (so that people walk more), better access to markets with reasonable-priced fresh produce, anti-smoking and alcohol reduction strategies (notice how many booze and cigarette ads are in majority-black neighborhoods and in black-oriented media/events?), etc.; 14 July, 2009 15:33
susankay said...: Oh dear -- a trollished post, I gather. Let me just give an example of the glories of USA healthcare. My love and I either retired or became unemployed many years before we were eligible for our vaguely state-sponsored program of Medicare. Being risk-averse, we bought health insurance through our state-sponsored but private health plan. We are now paying over $900 a month for insurance that only covers expenses in excess of $10,000 for each of us each year -- and that $10,000 does not include our expenses for prescription drugs. And this is considered a safety net!!! For the health insurance company perhaps. Not for us.; 14 July, 2009 01:13