Canadian Premiere heads to US for Heart Surgery

We can file this one under the US is ranked 37th in heatlthcare:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/arti ... rt-surgery

OTTAWA–Danny Williams' decision to head south for heart surgery has sparked a furious debate on both sides of the border.

The premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, a former lawyer and millionaire businessman, left Monday for an unspecified cardiac surgical procedure at an undisclosed U.S. hospital. The move raised questions about whether he could have the operation in Canada.

Conservative Senator Wilbert Keon, a retired heart surgeon and professor emeritus at University of Ottawa, said Newfoundland does not have the special pumps and post-op technical support to allow all advanced complicated procedures to be performed there.

I know the argument is that not everyone in the US has access to the best medical care treatment in the world and I would agree but it brings up an interesting question. If me move to Canadian type system won't the US now be in the same boat as Canadians and others that are now seeking advanced medical care here?

This is a good example of why we need to slowly and carefully make changes to the health care system, instead of trying to emulate systems like they have in Canada that will provide a lower quality of care to many people we need to focus on providing the best quality care to everyone.

kinda reminds me of Reagan's comment about USSR

if capitalism is so bad and communism is so good - then why does Russia need barbed wire to keep their people in while we need barbed wire to keep people out?

Socialized medicine means watered down quality and eventually watered down access.

Thats just one example & hes coming here for the expertise & because he can afford it (or maybe its the Canadian taxpayer) in any event there are plenty of Americans going overseas for medical care because its more affordable for them. Its a catch 22 we are fast becomeing a nation of haves & have nots.

I agree with samhill. If I had millions of dollars and wanted to cheat death, you bet your bumm I would search out the best cutter I could. Ya know details would be nice with a story such as this, instead of conjecture. My money is on big bucks help cheat death.

My point is that many cite "Low quality" care here in the US and that is not the case, it's matter of availability. Do we lower standards to achieve more availability or try and make higher quality care available to more people?

If we go back to the CBO and HHS analysis that estimate no change or more expensive health care costs to those already paying into the system those people will continue to dwindle and we'll have less money supporting the system. That's not going to improve the quality of health care and as more people take advantage of a system they are not supporting it's inevitable that the quality will drop across the board.

You need to address the costs of people paying into the system now first and foremost.

You might be right Richard but I don`t recall too many if any complaining about quality of care compaired to cost of care, maybe quality factors in if your on the lower end of the monetary scale but are trying to hold on to whatever property you have. Seems the totally have nots get better care than the hard workers down on their luck.

And how will the "haves/have nots" system going to change under UHC?

If the Ins. is affordable & mandatory there won`t be any out there that won`t have insurance.

samhill wrote:If the Ins. is affordable & mandatory there won`t be any out there that won`t have insurance.

What is "affordable"?

Will "affordable" insurance cover the surgery mentioned in the article?

Or does that become a second tier and thus "unaffordable"?

Insurance will be as affordable the same way anything else, right now most on here must have good ins. most likely paid for by employers. Soon with the raise in premiums most employers will no longer offer insurance, you would (if lucky) be able to buy into a group plan if not you too will be without as are alot of the people that have lost jobs.

samhill wrote:Insurance will be as affordable the same way anything else, right now most on here must have good ins. most likely paid for by employers. Soon with the raise in premiums most employers will no longer offer insurance, you would (if lucky) be able to buy into a group plan if not you too will be without as are alot of the people that have lost jobs.

If the insurance is mandatory, what is the incentive to make it affordable?

samhill wrote:Thats just one example & hes coming here for the expertise & because he can afford it (or maybe its the Canadian taxpayer) in any event there are plenty of Americans going overseas for medical care because its more affordable for them. Its a catch 22 we are fast becomeing a nation of haves & have nots.

http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-485890 ... JSUy5EVEw=

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/21/health/21patient.html

Interesting articles say that in 2008 560,000 US patients went overseas for surgical procedures and suggests that 1.6 million will be doing that by 2012.

The articles suggest that the cause is the "cartelization" of care and malpractice lawsuit costs. I have been saying for months that the problem is caused by third party payers and the threat of lawsuits causing defensive medicine to be practiced. Third party payers remove the cost from the view of the consumer. Without the consumer's involvement in cost decisions, costs creep upward and the "cartelization" of the industry evolves in the absence of true competition.

The solution to US health care rests in making third party insurance arrangements illegal and by limiting malpractice awards to a predetermined standard. If the consumer worried more about getting stuck with a bill or a portion of it, they would ask more questions about cost and negotiate to their level affordability. Costs would plummet.

samhill wrote:Insurance will be as affordable the same way anything else, right now most on here must have good ins. most likely paid for by employers. Soon with the raise in premiums most employers will no longer offer insurance, you would (if lucky) be able to buy into a group plan if not you too will be without as are alot of the people that have lost jobs.

The bill won't help, there's a minimal fine if the employer doesn't provide insurance.

mikeandgerry wrote:
Interesting articles say that in 2008 560,000 US patients went overseas for surgical procedures and suggests that 1.6 million will be doing that by 2012.

I wonder how many went overseas because the procedure they wanted wasn't approved in the USA. I personally know a few cancer patients that took that route and was wondering how widespread it was.

mikeandgerry wrote:

samhill wrote:Thats just one example & hes coming here for the expertise & because he can afford it (or maybe its the Canadian taxpayer) in any event there are plenty of Americans going overseas for medical care because its more affordable for them. Its a catch 22 we are fast becomeing a nation of haves & have nots.

http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-485890 ... JSUy5EVEw=

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/21/health/21patient.html

Interesting articles say that in 2008 560,000 US patients went overseas for surgical procedures and suggests that 1.6 million will be doing that by 2012.

So let's see...we hand out visa's for people to come to school here and become doctors, then they go back home, and and use the fact that we have a Federally protected monopoly in health insurance to service all the people being screwed by that system?

And who said the free market was a failure?