Speak Out: Canadian Premier Unapologetic About U.S. Heart Surgery

Replies (18)

• Selective agenda driven recognition of reality.

  -- Posted by voyager on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 8:53 AM

• Fox had a clip of that interview yesterday. Just shows to go you.

  -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 9:06 AM

• some key points:

  "We do whatever we can to provide the best possible health care that we can in Newfoundland and Labrador. The Canadian health care system has a great reputation, but this is a very specialized piece of surgery that had to be done and I went to somebody who's doing this three or four times a day, five, six days a week."

  "If I'm entitled to any reimbursement from any Canadian health care system or any provincial health care system, then obviously I will apply for that as anybody else would," he said.

  "But I wrote out the cheque myself and paid for it myself and to this point, I haven't even looked into the possibility of any reimbursement. I don't know what I'm entitled to, if anything, and if it's nothing, then so be it."

  That Canada, with a population 1/7 of the US, is short a few super-specialist heart surgeons in a low-population province is no surprise.

  He had the means to pay for this specialized surgery out of pocket and merely chose the best surgeon available.

  And he fully plans on getting his "socialized" reimbursement from the Canadian government.

  HOW, exactly, is this an argument against socialized medicine?

  -- Posted by FriendO on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 1:47 PM

• You left out the part about weeks of waiting.

  -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 2:17 PM

• You mean the part that isn't in the story?

  -- Posted by FriendO on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 2:30 PM

• "jumping a line or a wait list"

  -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 2:57 PM

• I think you have imagined this scenario in your own brain.

  Who ever said anything about "weeks" of waiting? By his own admission, he wouldn't have had to wait at all. Why would anyone be concerned with a perception of "line jumping" if they were on some lengthy wait list?

  You somehow managed to prove the exact opposite of the point you were trying to make.

  -- Posted by FriendO on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 3:06 PM

• FriendO, Please continue to explain the point I was trying to make. I'll listen and learn.

  -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 3:20 PM

• I love to educate. Seems to be sorely lacking in these parts.

  -- Posted by FriendO on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 3:23 PM

• I mean really, it's not that hard - if you weren't opposed to the "Canadian" system, you wouldn't have posted the link. And you want to use their waiting lists as an argument against it.

  No one denies that their system has waiting lists. But you used a man who publicly stated he was concerned about looking like a line jumper because he would not have had to wait for his surgery as an example of a negative aspect of wait lists? How does that make sense? He stated that he had an option to get one kind of surgery there, or one kind of surgery here. Their system pays for it either way, so what difference does their wait list have to this story anyway?

  On top of that, you flat out just made up the "weeks of waiting" part. Why did you pick weeks when you could have said months or years, it would have sounded so much worse.

  -- Posted by FriendO on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 3:40 PM

• Since I didn't post the link am I for or against? I must have confused the 8 months he mentioned for weeks of waiting. And it is nice to know that he had the best treatment [that his own system could not provide] because he had the extra change in his pocket. Thanks for the education. Have you ever thought of taking some night classes. You could be a teacher at one of our failing government run schools, maybe teach health class.

  -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 4:09 PM

• Ike, From where are the natural rights that are presumed to exist presumed to come from?

  -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 5:56 PM

• FriendO,

  I POSTED THE LINK, NOT OLD JOHN. I have nothing to against the Canadian health system as long as I am not forced to use it. I want to PAY for my health care, not be forced to let someone provide it for me.

  -- Posted by John in Jackson on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 7:58 PM

• John, I should say I regret my display of childish reactionism to FrendO's post. I am sure any opinion is as valid as mine and I can understand the name confusion. But I wont.

  -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 8:13 PM

• You could look at it like this. There are some happy with a cold drink and a warm bathroom. But that does't mean the rest of us want government health care.

  -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 9:00 PM

• If memory serves the entire country of Canada had the same number of MRI machines in 1999 as did the city of Seattle, WA, according to a documentary I watched in college. If your doctor needed an MRI done for diagnostics your name went on a list, first come first served basis, and the average wait was 6-9 months, depending on where you lived. Canadians have literally died while waiting. This is because their system isn't designed to make a profit, people are only willing to pay a certain amount in taxes for health care and that is what money their government has to work with. It is also a system that is going bankrupt and is seeing doctors opening clinics, technically illegal, for profit and to address the needs of the citizens.

  The fundamental problem with our system is the reliance on insurance to pay for everything, providing no incentive for the patient to shop for better pricing. As evidence I submit LASIK eye surgery, generally not covered by insurance. Over the years it has improved in quality while becoming cheaper in cost as doctors have to compete for business. Requiring more of the same insurance aspects, as is the current proposal, will only exacerbate the problem.

  -- Posted by non-biasedphilosopher on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 9:34 PM

• Canada's wait times are done on purpose. It isn't a failure of their system, more a success actually. Canadians said they only wanted to pay for X amount for healthcare, that is why they only have few MRIs and such long wait times.

  the UK had the same issue and it choose to spend a little more on healthcare to reduce wait times, so it did.

  Canadians spend about half of what Americans pay per capita on healthcare. I am sure if they wanted to spend an extra $140,000,000,000 to bring it up to par they could buy PLENTY more doctors and MRI machines. Not to mention cost growth rates are far worse in the US.

  -- Posted by futile_rant on Thu, Feb 25, 2010, at 1:42 PM

• What are the requirements of participation in Canadian health care. Can immigrants get health care? What about a tourist that has a heart attack?

  -- Posted by Old John on Thu, Feb 25, 2010, at 2:15 PM