08-28-2015, 07:09 AM
RE: Tonsillectomy and UPPP and Coblation for base of Tongue
Ed, I don't think think Canada should privatise at all - I only said what the thinking was behind the decision on tonsillectomies, which came from an inside source, and that was all.
Personally, I think Canada should follow the NHS in Britain, after which it was vaguely modelled, and move to a two tier system. Everyone gets public health, and those who want it or can afford it can buy insurance to get a fast track, more luxurious system, usually within the same institution. It would take some pressure off the current system and speed up the waiting lists, and keep the medical money in Canada - the difference between the UK and Canada is that I would ensure the private system plows some of the profit back into the public system to shore it up and plug the gaps - dentistry, prescriptive medicine, etc. But that is just one doc's opinion, and pretty much the same one I would like to see instituted here in Switzerland (not a popular idea, btw, even amongst the medicos, although it would cut our paperwork by two thirds if we only had to deal with a single insurer, thus massively cutting our costs).
The reason it is breaking down in Canada is what I stated above, plus government foolishness around it and their inability to understand where and why the pressures are there and invest in it rather than cutting back support, which actually rises the cost. It was simply unthinkable that it would face the pressures it does now back when it was created - and who could have guessed? No one could have anticipated the number of chronic care diseases that arose from the early 1970s onward - who had heard of AIDS? Who could have anticipated the lifestyle impact back when medicine was only starting to understand it? This is an area that needed to, and needs to be rethought - how to make a large system respond to these changes without impacting cost and quality of care. Having each province run things their own way doesn't help, either, or that they have to transfer money back and forth between Ottawa and the provinces to do so. It would have been better to have a single NHS across Canada, both administratively and financially, but that way was not chosen, and so it goes, and I cannot be changed now.
Canadians have every right to feel proud of their health care. Canada does very well in WHO and OECD statistics, way better than the US in cost of health care per person and greater life expectancy, and the actual cost per person actually works out to almost the same as the basic mandatory health insurance in Switzerland, the difference being in Canada it comes from the taxes, in Switzerland it comes from the patient's pocket. Both are less than the average cost to a US citizen per year. However, some of that is an apples and pears comparison, because conditions in the various countries are quite different, as are the racial mixes. Moreover, it is a misnomer to call Canada's system socialised medicine, as the actual system is made up of private institutions getting financial restitution from a government source. So, a social insurance moniker would be more to the point. Doctors and hospitals are private, not publicly owned for the most part, in Canada, unlike say, the UK, where hospitals are public trust institutions and doctors are quasi employees of the NHS if they work in that system.
Personally, I think Canada should follow the NHS in Britain, after which it was vaguely modelled, and move to a two tier system. Everyone gets public health, and those who want it or can afford it can buy insurance to get a fast track, more luxurious system, usually within the same institution. It would take some pressure off the current system and speed up the waiting lists, and keep the medical money in Canada - the difference between the UK and Canada is that I would ensure the private system plows some of the profit back into the public system to shore it up and plug the gaps - dentistry, prescriptive medicine, etc. But that is just one doc's opinion, and pretty much the same one I would like to see instituted here in Switzerland (not a popular idea, btw, even amongst the medicos, although it would cut our paperwork by two thirds if we only had to deal with a single insurer, thus massively cutting our costs).
The reason it is breaking down in Canada is what I stated above, plus government foolishness around it and their inability to understand where and why the pressures are there and invest in it rather than cutting back support, which actually rises the cost. It was simply unthinkable that it would face the pressures it does now back when it was created - and who could have guessed? No one could have anticipated the number of chronic care diseases that arose from the early 1970s onward - who had heard of AIDS? Who could have anticipated the lifestyle impact back when medicine was only starting to understand it? This is an area that needed to, and needs to be rethought - how to make a large system respond to these changes without impacting cost and quality of care. Having each province run things their own way doesn't help, either, or that they have to transfer money back and forth between Ottawa and the provinces to do so. It would have been better to have a single NHS across Canada, both administratively and financially, but that way was not chosen, and so it goes, and I cannot be changed now.
Canadians have every right to feel proud of their health care. Canada does very well in WHO and OECD statistics, way better than the US in cost of health care per person and greater life expectancy, and the actual cost per person actually works out to almost the same as the basic mandatory health insurance in Switzerland, the difference being in Canada it comes from the taxes, in Switzerland it comes from the patient's pocket. Both are less than the average cost to a US citizen per year. However, some of that is an apples and pears comparison, because conditions in the various countries are quite different, as are the racial mixes. Moreover, it is a misnomer to call Canada's system socialised medicine, as the actual system is made up of private institutions getting financial restitution from a government source. So, a social insurance moniker would be more to the point. Doctors and hospitals are private, not publicly owned for the most part, in Canada, unlike say, the UK, where hospitals are public trust institutions and doctors are quasi employees of the NHS if they work in that system.
![[Image: kittens1.gif]](https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/kittens1.gif)
![[Image: q9x0k.jpg]](https://i.imgflip.com/q9x0k.jpg)
