cleared, then busted

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...

Economists who can count all the inputs say that in total, Canada spends
considerably less per person on health care than the US. And unlike the
US, they don't leave out 1/4 of the population while doing it.


Canadian hospitals have less modern equipment available than American
hospitals do. They depend on American medicines after destroying incentives
to develop their own with price controls. They buy American medicines in
bulk covering only the manufacturing costs, while American hospitals have to
cover development costs as well. In short, American health care is better
than Canadian health care.

In a previous article, "Steven P. McNicoll" said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
Economists who can count all the inputs say that in total, Canada spends
considerably less per person on health care than the US. And unlike the
US, they don't leave out 1/4 of the population while doing it.
Canadian hospitals have less modern equipment available than American
hospitals do. They depend on American medicines after destroying incentives
to develop their own with price controls. They buy American medicines in
bulk covering only the manufacturing costs, while American hospitals have to
cover development costs as well. In short, American health care is better
than Canadian health care.

You have proof for any of those assertions, or did you just pull the whole
thing out of your ass? And since when does paying less for the same drugs
equate to having worse health care? It sounds better to me. Sounds
better to those busloads of Amercians coming across the border to buy
them, too.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Real Time, adj.:
Here and now, as opposed to fake time, which only occurs there
and then.

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...

You have proof for any of those assertions, or did you just pull the whole
thing out of your ass?


Sure, just as you have proof for your claim that economists who can count
all the inputs say that in total, Canada spends considerably less per person
on health care than the US, and unlike the US, they don't leave out 1/4 of
the population while doing it.



And since when does paying less for the same drugs
equate to having worse health care? It sounds better to me. Sounds
better to those busloads of Amercians coming across the border to buy
them, too.


It sounds better in the short term. In the long term if nobody pays the
development costs of new drugs there'll be no new drugs.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:


It sounds better in the short term. In the long term if nobody pays the
development costs of new drugs there'll be no new drugs.

You're missing that, from Canada's perspective, the development is free.
That's a given, at least under current conditions.

So their healthcare doesn't suffer from a lack of R&D funding. Clever of
them. Bad for us, but why should they care if we're willing to bend over
for them?

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...

You're missing that, from Canada's perspective, the development is free.
That's a given, at least under current conditions.


I haven't missed that. If we follow Canada's lead, as many seem to want,
the US will also cease to develop new drugs.

Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, "Steven P. McNicoll" said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
Economists who can count all the inputs say that in total, Canada spends
considerably less per person on health care than the US. And unlike the
US, they don't leave out 1/4 of the population while doing it.
Canadian hospitals have less modern equipment available than American
hospitals do. They depend on American medicines after destroying incentives
to develop their own with price controls. They buy American medicines in
bulk covering only the manufacturing costs, while American hospitals have to
cover development costs as well. In short, American health care is better
than Canadian health care.

You have proof for any of those assertions, or did you just pull the whole
thing out of your ass? And since when does paying less for the same drugs
equate to having worse health care? It sounds better to me. Sounds
better to those busloads of Amercians coming across the border to buy
them, too.

Busloads of Americans coming to the border to save some bucks on drugs sound a lot
better than the busloads of Canadians going South to get timely badly needed medical
care, due to long waiting lines at government run hospitals back home. [Wall Street
Journal 7/23/02 "Socialized medicine is a real headache."]

In a previous article, Lynn Melrose said:
Busloads of Americans coming to the border to save some bucks on drugs
sound a lot better than the busloads of Canadians going South to get
timely badly needed medical care, due to long waiting lines at government
run hospitals back home. [Wall Street Journal 7/23/02 "Socialized
medicine is a real headache."]

The Canadians coming south are queue jumpers who don't want to
wait their turn for non-emergency care. My dad had a heart attack a few
years ago and had two CAT scans and an MRI and surgery within 6 hours.
And his cardiac surgeon was the same guy who was featured on an episode of
NOVA many years ago for his innovative rehabilitation techniques (a group
of his patients were shown running the Ironman Triathlon in Hawaii).

There is nothing wrong with the Canadian system that couldn't be cured by
spending as much per person as the US system does. There is nothing wrong
with the US "system" that couldn't be cured by burning a few insurance
company bean counters and their bought politicians at the stake.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
It might not be practical, it might not be a good idea, but it could work.
Sort of like Windows.
-- berry

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message


The Canadians coming south are queue jumpers who don't want to
wait their turn for non-emergency care.

hmm....

There is nothing wrong with the Canadian system that couldn't be
cured by spending as much per person as the US system does.

It would seem to me that those "queue jumpers" are indeed driving up the
"total inputs" you mentioned a few posts ago - and are more than willing to
spend the money.

No, American healthcare isn't everything I'd like it to be, but I shudder to
think what it would be like under government administration. If you want to
talk about HMO's and how the lawyers are deciding more about medical
practice than doctors, I'm all ears. Bring in the government and I'll show
you the door.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
__________

Paul Tomblin wrote:

There is nothing wrong
with the US "system" that couldn't be cured by burning a few insurance
company bean counters and their bought politicians at the stake.

We've no reason to believe that this is correct...but perhaps we should try
it as an experiment grin.

- Andrew

Busloads of Americans coming to the border to save some bucks on drugs
sound a lot
better than the busloads of Canadians going South to get timely badly
needed medical
care, due to long waiting lines at government run hospitals back home.
[Wall Street
Journal 7/23/02 "Socialized medicine is a real headache."]

Here in the UK healthcare is free at the point of delivery and is accessible
to everyone. I also have private health insurance provided by my employer
and that is for when I want non emergency treatment or treatment at my time
of choosing. For emergencies the National Health Service is as good as it
gets. For non urgent treatment like a hip replacement there could be a wait
of up to six months.

I have an impingement in my shoulder, possibly a torn rotator cuff. Using
the private insurance I have had an MRI scan, and got an appointment for
surgery set up for January after my Christmas Holiday in Florida. I could
have had the operation yesterday but the recovery might have got in the way
of the vacation (no flying).

Its all paid for out of taxes and is available on the basis of need not
wallet or insurance. It does leave us open to abuse as there are cases of
foreigners who fly in, get diagnosed as being ill and then get treatment. We
just have to live with that, it a mark of a civilised society and in a funny
Christian sort of way, turning the other cheek.

Its comforting knowing that if anyone in my family gets ill, I don't have to
worry about who pays.

On a more stupid point, over the counter drugs policy in the US is so
different from here.

For example, here Ibuprofen is sold only in blister packs of 16 tablets. It
is illegal to sell more. Yet last time I was in the US I bought a tub of 500
at Wal Mart for next to nothing. Here the reason is that these things are
considered dangerous (suicide) etc. Mid you if you go the urge to kill
yourself in Wal Mart, its easier and to get a gun and shoot yourself than
swallow 500 ibuprofen tablets.