On July 6, CNN’s American Morning may have positioned themselves as a fly in the White House’s public health-care ointment. In a story on Senator Mitch McConnell’s recent comments regarding Canadian national health care, CNN traveled to Canada to investigate whether this vision of long queues in health care was warranted. In investigating, however, CNN neglected to ask an important question of their own story, regarding the possible rationing of the healthcare of cancer patients.
The hospital singled out for Senator McConnell’s rhetorical wrath is Kingston General in Ontario, Canada. CNN’s Dana Bash traveled there under guise of inquiring whether McConnell’s view of Kingston was accurate.
Senator MITCH MCCONNELL: Knee replacements. Well, at Kingston General, the average wait is about 340 days.
BASH: Zelt's response, McConnell is exaggerating.
DR. DAVID ZELT, Chief-of-staff, KINGSTON GEN. HOSPITAL: Average time to get a knee replacement here is 91 days.
This may prove to be an accurate assessment. Oddly, however, this seems to be almost an afterthought in Bash’s report – choosing instead to highlight two anecdotes within Canadian health care.
Bash first interviewed Shana Holmes, a Canadian who was diagnosed with a brain tumor roughly four years ago. At the time, Bash reported, Holmes faced quite a wait for treatment:
BASH: (voice over): For Shana Holmes, simple pleasures, playing with her dog, walking in her garden, are a gift. Four years ago, she was diagnosed with a brain tumor. Told if it wasn't removed she could go blind or die.
SHANA HOLMES: I realized right after the surgery how bad my vision was.
BASH: Shana is Canadian, but for her surgery she went to the U.S. because it would have taken four to six months just to see specialists in Canada's government-run health system, the only option here.
And how much did Holmes’ surgery cost?
BASH (voice-over): Shana's bills at the Mayo Clinic where she was treated total $100,000. She borrowed from family and friends.
That, incidentally, is in addition to the higher taxes Holmes still has paid over the course of her life – for free health care.
However, not all Canadian cancer patients must wait so long for treatment. Bash then interviewed another Canadian, who was treated almost immediately for the tumor in his leg:
Despite Shana Holmes' horror story, Canadian officials insist most patients with life threatening problems are treated quickly. Doug Wright can attest to that. He has cancer, a tumor on his leg. He's got the money to get care in the U.S., but says there's no reason.
DOUG WRIGHT, CANADIAN PATIENT: I've not had to wait. I've seen, you know, some of the best specialists in the country.
That sounds quite acceptable, at first blush. However, Bash neglected to ask the question staring her starkly in the face: Of the two patients featured, whose procedure cost more? Holmes required brain surgery for a tumor that was leaning on her ocular nerve, while Wright required surgery on his leg. Both were suffering from tumors, but Wright’s may have been easier – not to mention less costly – to remove.
One wonders why the issue of cost-rationing was not addressed in Bash’s report.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
It might not apply to
July 6, 2009 - 15:08 ET by Chris NormanIt might not apply to these stories, but from what I understand, rationing and prioritizing of health care will be affected by the ages of the patients, with the elderly falling by the wayside.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Demographic Trends
July 6, 2009 - 15:40 ET by JDWCanada's orthopedic surgeons are are performing significantly more hip and knee replacements, the largest rate of increase in patients is between the ages of 45 and 55.
Hip and knee replacements last about 10 to 15yrs, so younger
patients who are getting surgery now foresee revision surgery
to correct or replace their artificial joints in a few years.
Chances are elective surgery in this area has increased about 90% in the past decade. If you want to be placed on the sideline, cancer is perfect. If health care is passed, there will be an influx of these poor people before it becomes law.
JDW
DAILY WAVE
Jobs, jobs, jobs ... Spending, spending, spending
JDW,When I heard that,
July 6, 2009 - 16:09 ET by Chris NormanJDW,
When I heard that, in Great Britain, the elderly are refused some medical treatments because of cost/benefit reasons, it chilled me. It sounds like something out of "Brave New World". Coupled with things like what happened in Florida with Terry Schiavo, I worry about where we are going with health care and the value we place on human life. The amount of money that will be spent on national health care is a mere fiscal thing that almost pales when compared to the cold-blooded "Netherlandsization" of our society where some people are deemed disposable. Looking back, abortion on demand probably got this ball rolling. Once some people are considered disposable, more and more people fall under that category. Of course, it will all be couched in words of "compassion" and what "benefits" society.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Britain
July 6, 2009 - 16:21 ET by JDWPrivate medical treatment in Britain is amongst the best in the world. Most people go private to avoid NHS (socialized) waiting lists for non-emergency specialist appointments and non-urgent treatment. Around a quarter of all operations are performed privately. You will often end up seeing the same specialist privately as you would have seen through the NHS.
Britian will reverse.
JDW
DAILY WAVE
When people fear their government there is tyranny.
When government fears the people there is liberty.
Most people? No, most
July 7, 2009 - 07:07 ET by tarunkjuyalMost people? No, most wealthy people in Britain go to private health care instead of NHS.
Correction
July 7, 2009 - 13:51 ET by UnsaneMost people who can afford it get out of the NHS. This is because most people do not wish to wait all day and all night to see the doctor.
Sounds to me like you are extremely angry that there are those out there who can be called "wealthy".
Private insurance is taking off in countries where the government is the Big Nanny. In the Netherlands, the percentage of those who have private health insurance is approaching 40%. Could this be because the government does such a poor job at being a nanny?
It is truly amazing. The government can barely get mail delivery right, or do it in a cost effective manner. The government sure as all hell cannot educate our children. Yet we are ALL supposed to have total blind faith that the government can totally baby us all with "free" health care, and that is will be GREAT!!!
Another thing: 85% of the world's medical advances comes from right here in the United States. Who will the world's Nanny States sponge off of if this country turns into a Nanny State?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Just the fact that a person
July 6, 2009 - 15:39 ET by Kat Outta the BagJust the fact that a person with a brain tumor would have had to wait longer than a person with a leg tumor - by the way, couldn't they have been more specific with that one? - is concerning in itself. Why the difference if they're both on the same government health plan?
At the very least, their
July 6, 2009 - 16:20 ET by Mike SargentAt the very least, their priorities are backward. Based on the small amount of medical information we have, the leg tumor was an equal threat (as the brain tumor) of remote metastisazation. Thus, if the worst-case scenario for the leg tumor is amputation (horrible, I am well aware), and the worst-case scenario for the brain tumor is blindness or death (much worse than amputation)...it would seem that Canada gave expedited treatment to the wrong person.
If, however, your cost/benefit analysis includes the difficulty of the surgery, limiting factors such as neurosurgeons versus unspecialized surgeons, average rate of success in the procedure, and cost to the state...it might be logically sound to choose the person with a better chance of full recovery.
And there's the rub. The bureaucrat chose.
Not the patient.
Waiting times in Canada
July 6, 2009 - 16:41 ET by DemonhunterOn February 26th I suffered damage to my knee playing tennis. The ER put me in a foam cast until I could see my GP a week later. My GP referred me to a specialist and ordered an MRI. The appointment with the specialist was for April 24th, the MRI was scheduled for July 21st. A surgery date, if required might be in 2009, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Ontario may have shorter waits than here in B.C., but why in the hell do I have to wait 8 to 10 months before getting surgical repair? Answer: I don't if I pay and go outside the system.
Nearly five months until I even have a reliable diagnosis? Thanks Obama, you can keep the change. Impose Canadian/British health services on your own family first. Then maybe we'll talk.
If it's not the Crusades, it's the cartoons
From Demonhunter:
July 6, 2009 - 16:51 ET by Kat Outta the Bag"On February 26th I suffered damage to my knee playing tennis. The ER put me in a foam cast until I could see my GP a week later. My GP referred me to a specialist and ordered an MRI. The appointment with the specialist was for April 24th, the MRI was scheduled for July 21st. A surgery date, if required might be in 2009, but I wouldn't bet on it."
That's totally backwards...shouldn't one have the MRI before seeing the specialist so that the specialist can better evaluate the situation on the first visit? That was a rhetorical question, of course. I already have a worn meniscus in my knee...this isn't making me hopeful that I can have decent treatment of it when the time comes, if the time comes under Obamacare.
Good luck on your treatment, Demonhunter.
Where are the apologists?
July 6, 2009 - 17:18 ET by UnsaneI wonder where our resident Canadian apologist, mandrake, is?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
I'm waiting in line dammit.
July 6, 2009 - 18:53 ET by mandrakeI'm waiting in line dammit. :)
... whereas in the U.S.,
July 7, 2009 - 07:06 ET by tarunkjuyal... whereas in the U.S., the HMO cost accountant choses.
Not the patient.
So what do you think will
July 7, 2009 - 09:41 ET by motherbeltSo what do you think will be different?
in Obama's plan, the government accountant will end up choosing, not the HMO accountant.
Is that supposed to be better?
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
IF! IF! IF!
July 7, 2009 - 13:55 ET by Unsane...IF you have an HMO, which not all Americans do (some just have medical insurance, and some do the very shocking thing of paying the doc as they go, as I did some time ago when I visited a hygienist for a tooth cleaning). And even if you do not like the decision your HMO makes, you CAN get a second opinion elsewhere.
When the government becomes your nanny, as you so deeply ache for, if you want a second opinion, the response? "Too bad."
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
It needs reposting, so here
July 6, 2009 - 17:20 ET by UnsaneEnjoy.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
"BASH: Zelt's response,
July 6, 2009 - 17:33 ET by ckc1227"BASH: Zelt's response, McConnell is exaggerating.
DR. DAVID ZELT, Chief-of-staff, KINGSTON GEN. HOSPITAL: Average time to get a knee replacement here is 91 days."
2 years ago, my mother was diagnosed with a bad knee and scheduled for knee replacement surgery. Her wait time? 6 days. She was diagnosed on a Wednesday, and went under the knife the following Tuesday.
Man, the American health care system really sucks. Something has to be done.....we're treating patients too quickly here.
And we're spending too much too. The countries who send patients home with a bottle of aspirin and a spot on a waiting list are the ones spending the proper amount.
Great Minds Think Alike!
July 6, 2009 - 18:47 ET by stratmanMike:
I was just reviewing the 16th Edition this morning!
Now I have the 18th annual edition of Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada after reading your post.
Thank you.
jessieH
July 6, 2009 - 19:03 ET by jessieHjessieH CNN is a joke. I never watch these hacks. I want truth, not fiction from a bunch of corrupt buffoons.
corrupt?
July 6, 2009 - 20:28 ET by American.PatriotNaw, just following the direction of dear leader....
"When I look in the mirror, I say, 'He did not sell his soul for short-term politics.'" President George W. Bush, June 18, 2009
They keep saying that Canadian health care is free...
July 6, 2009 - 19:43 ET by Don DeskinsIt is NOT FREE.
Let metell my story. My Canadian in-laws live in a closed retirement community in Canada. A friend of theirs in the community went to Hawaii on vacation and had a heart attack. The doctors told him that he needed quadruple bi-pass and it would cost $40,000. He opted to travel back to Canada for the surgery.
When he got back to Canada and was seen by the surgeon, the surgeon told him that sure enough, he would need quadruple bi-pass. The earliest possible date was in 6 MONTHS!
Hell no it ain't free
July 6, 2009 - 20:58 ET by UnsaneCanada is a country that taxes the sale of POSTAGE STAMPS. Hell no it is not free to be pampered and babied by the government there!
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
If you think health care is
July 7, 2009 - 09:44 ET by motherbeltIf you think health care is expensive now, what until you see what it costs when it's free! - P.J. O'Rourke
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
A lot of money to stand in line
July 6, 2009 - 22:53 ET by dboThis is a fallacy that Canadian health care is free. The rules are different in every province but in the province I live in (British Columbia) we must pay premiums to are Medical Sevices Plan (MSP) in order to obtain insurance. Last year I paid aproximately $1300 (for a family of four) in premiums on top of the various assorted taxes. In addition, your basic MSP does not cover any dental or prescription drugs. And you are quite correct, your insurance is only valid within the province. If you want insurance while you travel, that costs extra.
"...insurance is only valid within the province..."
July 7, 2009 - 06:36 ET by tarunkjuyalWrong. Your British Columbia insurance is valid right across Canada, in any province. If you are insured in Quebec and you need hospital care in Manitoba, you get it. Plain and simple. If you are insured in Saskatchewan and you need to see a doctor in Ontario, you get it. Plain and simple.
My point is the same
July 7, 2009 - 09:40 ET by dboI'm sorry. You're quite correct. I meant to say MSP is only valid within the country. If you want insurance outside the country, that costs extra.
Just let me pay for it
July 7, 2009 - 13:59 ET by UnsaneIf you are insured in Quebec and you need hospital care in Manitoba, you get it. Plain and simple. If you are insured in Saskatchewan and you need to see a doctor in Ontario, you get it. Plain and simple. After how long a wait? Will you get it on days when doctors and nurses decide to go on strike? Will the wait time be shorter if you just go home to your home province?
When my health care was "free", I had to wait 16 hours for a ten minute visit with the doc to tell me what I already knew. Then I had to go wait for 4 more hours to get the medication required. When I had to pay for it, I was in and out of the hospital in two hours or less.
I'd much rather pay for it and get on with my life.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Yeah but did he have to pay
July 7, 2009 - 07:02 ET by tarunkjuyalYeah but did he have to pay $40,000 for the 4x bi-pass in Canada? Hardly.
Make up your mind -- is the issue cost or wait times? Your subject alludes to cost but the ghist of your comment is the 6-month wait time. What is your real point?
Of course it isn't "free" -- nothing is, friend. It is paid-for from general tax revenue. But I guarantee that your in-laws' friend did not get a surgery bill in the mail from the BC government for $40,000.
Why cannot both issues,
July 7, 2009 - 09:29 ET by BDWhy cannot both issues, Cost and Wait times be eaqually weighted in the COA development?
Regarding your assessment that the cost of a bypass in Canada did not approach 40K. When you add the incredibly high level of taxation in the country you would assess that on average the cost of the operation to a Canadian would be higher and the service poorer.
But the waste - oh the waste of a federally mandated program....
Nanny State
July 7, 2009 - 14:09 ET by UnsaneIf he had to pay that $40,000 south of the border his wait time would be infinetely shorter and he would be able to get on with his life, not to mention avert a dangerous situation.
The issue is both cost and wait times. Why do you insist on punishing and stealing from the healthy to subsidize and baby the sick, some of whom have done every single thing in their power to become sick?
See, the way it is now, I do not pay for the doc unless I need the doc. Which only makes sense. I do not pay for groceries until I need them. I only pay for the electricity I use. And so on.
And, since the "free" health care system to the north is essentially a subsidy of health care costs until they hit "zero", there is no (the magic word) incentive for people to not run screaming to the doctor for anything and everything, from sniffles to paper cuts. (See, when you actually pay for things out of your own pocket, it encourages you to think about what you can do for saving money: for instance, maybe you could treat a cold at home with some acetomeniphen that costs $5 rather than go to a doc who will charge $50.) Hence the long waits in line.
Canadians are poorer on average by about C$8100 than their American counterparts because of government babying. And before you come at me whining about how Canadians care more about the elderly and the poor due to things like their Nanny State, let me remind you that the evil, capitalistic society to Canada's south, for some bizarre reason, runs rings around all the world's Nanny States in terms of charitable giving. I would suggest that more can be accomplished via charity to hospitals to treat the truly destitute than can be done by nationalizing 1/5 of the U.S. economy and destroying that which is responsible for 85% of the world's medical advances. The Nanny States of the world like to think of themselves as putting forth a kinder,gentler form of capitalism, but the Nanny States at the end are hardly humane.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Most people...
July 7, 2009 - 06:33 ET by tarunkjuyalMost people? No, most wealthy people in Britain go to private health care instead of NHS. Get your facts straight, please.
Most who work and thus can
July 7, 2009 - 09:30 ET by BDMost who work and thus can afford it.
There is no such thing as a free lunch my friend.
It seems to me that you're
July 7, 2009 - 14:34 ET by Mike SargentIt seems to me that you're missing the point, both of you. Why do rich folks in Britain go outside the NHS?
Why do the rich people not use the same system as the poor folk?
Is it possible that the service is better and faster outside government-run health systems?
Someone doesn't understand the problem with wait times
July 7, 2009 - 10:21 ET by PharmerSo I'm going put this in simple language.
A
disease can kill you while you are waiting for the treatment.
Coronary artery disease leads to a problem called Heart Attack, for
example. If your partial vascular occlusion becomes a total occlusion
while you are waiting, the lack of oxygen to the heart muscle causes
the h-e-a-r-t a-t-t-a-c-k.
Oh....
I am addressing a person who thinks socialized medicine is OK, because
he likes higher taxes better than health care bills... .....better
explain.
Occlusion means a blockage.... are you getting this?
Now
let's go to the long wait for addressing the brain tumor. The long
w.a.i.t. time can allow the tumor to g.r.o.w larger, perhaps making it
inoperable and/or, less able to be treated. Also, in simple language,
Canada does n.o.t have a large selection of chemotherapy drugs
available for treatment, so it is really vital to have the problems
addressed as quickly as possible.
I hope this is helpful in explaining some of the problems associated with being forced to wait longer for treatment.
Let me know if you need further explanation........
Re Rationing
July 7, 2009 - 11:46 ET by slickwillie2001Rahm Emmanuel's brother, Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel is the Bamster's Special Advisor on Health Policy, and he is working on the criteria for rationing. These are the options:
Treating People Equally
Prioritarianism
Utilitarianism
This is bloody terrifying stuff folks. Rationing is coming. What does 'most socially useful' mean? Does it mean keeping alive alcoholic homicidal old horndog Senators over us regular folks? Does it mean keeping alive valuable democratic party donors over conservatives? Does it mean keeping alive selected minorities in order to preserve America's 'diversity'?
Electing God: http://pajamasmedia.com
"The most socially useful"
July 7, 2009 - 14:12 ET by UnsaneSaving the most socially useful? Richard Lamm would surely approve.
That to me is a euphemism for allowing for euthanasia in order to save the state money - oh, I'm sorry, to allow people do "die with dignity". (That both birth and death are the two most undignified acts a human being can undergo of course is not commented upon.)
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Ezekial Emmanueal is quite
July 7, 2009 - 15:28 ET by stratmanEzekial Emmanueal is quite a polished propagandist. The spin and outright lies (says there will be no rationing in the government model) is mindboggling and nonstop. He also uses fast talking to throw the crap at you, moving on before you hardly have time to digest and respond to the spin of his previous point.
Watch this carnival barker's speech (multipart on YouTube) at the City Club of Cleveland on June 16, 2008... if you can stomach him. The question and answer session is interesting.
I recall reading that Emmanuel does not accept Medicare in his own medical practice. Is this true? If so, then he is an elitist hypocrite, considering his rhetoric.
Friends of the Chamber
July 7, 2009 - 18:02 ET by mld678This is a key issuefor American workers right now. Additionally, encouraging a workplace health program is a greatway to lower overall health care costs and to improve employee health. Companies of all sizes can incorporatewellness and prevention into the workplace. Find out how and sign a petition at http://www.friendsoftheuschamber.com/issues/index.cfm?ID=52
I may add
July 7, 2009 - 21:39 ET by UnsaneAll one needs to do is to see how Safeway has made the health care costs for its employees "flatline" over the past decade. There are ways out there in the private sector to make health care cheaper and better.
One way I'd like to do it is this: make individuals responsible for risks. Hey, if that works for auto insurance, why not health insurance?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)