<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Canadian health care coverage: equal coverage for all &#8212; equally rotten</title>
	<atom:link href="http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7329" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329</link>
	<description>President Bush and the Republicans spent way, way, way too much money, but when it comes to spending, they were bush leaguers — pun intended — compared to President Obama and the Democrats.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 08:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Common Sense Political Thought &#187; Blog Archive &#187; My health care anecdata</title>
		<link>http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-568419</link>
		<dc:creator>Common Sense Political Thought &#187; Blog Archive &#187; My health care anecdata</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:51:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-568419</guid>
		<description>[...] between patient care and service in the United States and the socialized medicine countries. I have previously noted the long waiting times endured by the citizens of our good neighbor to the north, prosperous, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] between patient care and service in the United States and the socialized medicine countries. I have previously noted the long waiting times endured by the citizens of our good neighbor to the north, prosperous, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phoenician in a time of Romans</title>
		<link>http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-534417</link>
		<dc:creator>Phoenician in a time of Romans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:52:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-534417</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;Possibly, but I suspect they’re typical. Long waits don’t seem to be the problem here that you hear about in other countries. &lt;/em&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.reuters.com/article/health-SP-A/idUSN1549047220080116&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Uh-huh&lt;/a&gt;.

&lt;em&gt;Last time I had to use the hospital (bike accident) I was seen and treated within minutes, including getting a CAT scan. 

See if that happens in Canada or other countries with socialized medicine!&lt;/em&gt;

The last two times I went to the emergency room, I got initial treatment immediately (IV hydration and an anti-histamine shot).  Then they put me under observation to see that I was okay, and discharged me after a couple of hours.

At the risk of spoiling your uninformed opinion with some ugly facts, see &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Performance-Snapshots/International-Comparisons/International-Comparison--Access---Timeliness.aspx&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;.

&lt;blockquote&gt;
U.S. patients reported relatively longer waiting times for doctor appointments when they were sick, but relatively shorter waiting times to be seen at the ER, see a specialist, and have elective surgery. Specifically:

- The percentage of U.S. patients who waited six days or more for a doctor appointment when sick was not significantly different from the rate in Canada (23% v. 36%), the worst-performing country. 

- Only 47 percent of U.S. patients were able to see a doctor on the same or next day when sick, versus 61 percent to 81 percent of patients in the four better-performing nations.

- U.S. patients were less likely than patients in Canada (12% v. 24%) but more likely than patients in Germany (4%) to wait four hours or more to be seen in the emergency department.

- U.S. patients were less likely than patients in four countries (except Germany) to wait four weeks or longer to see a specialist (23% v. 40%–60%) or to wait four months or longer for elective surgery (8% v. 19%–41%) (Schoen et al. 2005)
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Possibly, but I suspect they’re typical. Long waits don’t seem to be the problem here that you hear about in other countries. </em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/health-SP-A/idUSN1549047220080116" rel="nofollow">Uh-huh</a>.</p>
<p><em>Last time I had to use the hospital (bike accident) I was seen and treated within minutes, including getting a CAT scan. </p>
<p>See if that happens in Canada or other countries with socialized medicine!</em></p>
<p>The last two times I went to the emergency room, I got initial treatment immediately (IV hydration and an anti-histamine shot).  Then they put me under observation to see that I was okay, and discharged me after a couple of hours.</p>
<p>At the risk of spoiling your uninformed opinion with some ugly facts, see <a href="http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Performance-Snapshots/International-Comparisons/International-Comparison--Access---Timeliness.aspx" rel="nofollow">this</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>
U.S. patients reported relatively longer waiting times for doctor appointments when they were sick, but relatively shorter waiting times to be seen at the ER, see a specialist, and have elective surgery. Specifically:</p>
<p>- The percentage of U.S. patients who waited six days or more for a doctor appointment when sick was not significantly different from the rate in Canada (23% v. 36%), the worst-performing country. </p>
<p>- Only 47 percent of U.S. patients were able to see a doctor on the same or next day when sick, versus 61 percent to 81 percent of patients in the four better-performing nations.</p>
<p>- U.S. patients were less likely than patients in Canada (12% v. 24%) but more likely than patients in Germany (4%) to wait four hours or more to be seen in the emergency department.</p>
<p>- U.S. patients were less likely than patients in four countries (except Germany) to wait four weeks or longer to see a specialist (23% v. 40%–60%) or to wait four months or longer for elective surgery (8% v. 19%–41%) (Schoen et al. 2005)
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phoenician in a time of Romans</title>
		<link>http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-534414</link>
		<dc:creator>Phoenician in a time of Romans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:42:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-534414</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;The Canadians pay for it in advance, in their higher taxes. That’s their form of insurance. &lt;/em&gt;

Correct.

In 2006, per-capita spending for health care in Canada was US$3,678 - in the U.S. it was US$6,714.

So the question might be - is it better to pay $3,600 in taxes for better results, or $6,700 for worse results?  And please recall that health care costs in the US are rising way faster than GDP growth.

&lt;em&gt;And if I have to go to the ER, I will have a moderate co-payment (I think mine is $50 for the ER) but I won’t face “a hefty bill.”&lt;/em&gt;

Assumign your insurance company pays. You may have missed the bit in the article where she already &lt;b&gt;had&lt;/b&gt; insurance, but the company said that bleeding from the nipple wasn&#039;t sufficiently &quot;urgent&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>The Canadians pay for it in advance, in their higher taxes. That’s their form of insurance. </em></p>
<p>Correct.</p>
<p>In 2006, per-capita spending for health care in Canada was US$3,678 &#8211; in the U.S. it was US$6,714.</p>
<p>So the question might be &#8211; is it better to pay $3,600 in taxes for better results, or $6,700 for worse results?  And please recall that health care costs in the US are rising way faster than GDP growth.</p>
<p><em>And if I have to go to the ER, I will have a moderate co-payment (I think mine is $50 for the ER) but I won’t face “a hefty bill.”</em></p>
<p>Assumign your insurance company pays. You may have missed the bit in the article where she already <b>had</b> insurance, but the company said that bleeding from the nipple wasn&#8217;t sufficiently &#8220;urgent&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dana Pico</title>
		<link>http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-534397</link>
		<dc:creator>Dana Pico</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:34:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-534397</guid>
		<description>Perry asked:

&lt;blockquote&gt;Dana, are the wait times you reference for elective surgery only? If so, I would have no problem with it.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

The definition used by the Fraser Institure:

&lt;blockquote&gt;Total waiting time between referral from a general practitioner and treatment, averaged across all 12 specialties and 10 provinces surveyed&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Such would include both elective and non-elective treatment.  

Then again, how would you define elective?  Miss Woodkey&#039;s condition was not life-threatening, and she could have lived with it, and &lt;i&gt;did&lt;/i&gt; live with it for more than a year.  Yes, she was in chronic pain, but the fact she was able to live with it for a year means that it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be defined as elective.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perry asked:</p>
<blockquote><p>Dana, are the wait times you reference for elective surgery only? If so, I would have no problem with it.</p></blockquote>
<p>The definition used by the Fraser Institure:</p>
<blockquote><p>Total waiting time between referral from a general practitioner and treatment, averaged across all 12 specialties and 10 provinces surveyed</p></blockquote>
<p>Such would include both elective and non-elective treatment.  </p>
<p>Then again, how would you define elective?  Miss Woodkey&#8217;s condition was not life-threatening, and she could have lived with it, and <i>did</i> live with it for more than a year.  Yes, she was in chronic pain, but the fact she was able to live with it for a year means that it <em>could</em> be defined as elective.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-534342</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:13:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/?p=7329#comment-534342</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Dana, your experiences are anecdotal.&lt;/blockquote&gt;


Possibly, but I suspect they&#039;re typical. Long waits don&#039;t seem to be the problem here that you hear about in other countries. Last time I had to use the hospital (bike accident) I was seen and treated within minutes, including getting a CAT scan. 

See if &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; happens in Canada or other countries with socialized medicine!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Dana, your experiences are anecdotal.</p></blockquote>
<p>Possibly, but I suspect they&#8217;re typical. Long waits don&#8217;t seem to be the problem here that you hear about in other countries. Last time I had to use the hospital (bike accident) I was seen and treated within minutes, including getting a CAT scan. </p>
<p>See if <em>that</em> happens in Canada or other countries with socialized medicine!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
