Jump to content

      













Photo

Health care in Victoria


  • Please log in to reply
186 replies to this topic

#21 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,488 posts

Posted 29 June 2009 - 11:03 PM

Oh no Davek is going to have a field day!:P

#22 mat

mat
  • Member
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 29 June 2009 - 11:11 PM

Oh no Davek is going to have a field day!:P


Christ Nparker - hadn't even moved the posts!!

Frankly myself, and other Mods are getting a little tired of personal attacks, no matter how mild or ironic. They come from all sides. Advocating your position is one thing - calling someone a 'troll' is another.

I will be watching this carefully - and hopefully the Flu thread will get back on track (partly my fault).

#23 davek

davek
  • Member
  • 670 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 06:43 AM

Some explanations on why US health care costs are so high, courtesy of Thomas Sowell. From the article;

We were not spending nearly as much on high-tech medical procedures in the past because there were not nearly as many of them, and we were not spending anything at all on some of the new pharmaceutical drugs because they didn't exist... We would like to have all these things without the rising costs that come with them. But only with medical care is such wishful thinking taken seriously, with government regarded as a sort of fairy godmother who will give us the benefits without the costs.

#24 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,488 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 07:33 AM

Christ Nparker - hadn't even moved the posts!!.


I made no personal attack, and have never, and would never call someone a troll. I simply suggested that this was an area in which Mr./Ms. Davek would enjoy voicing his or her opinion.

By the way I do not think you should be taking the Lord's name in vain. It is disrespectful to those who follow the 10 Commandments. We need to ensure that all posters are respected.

#25 eseedhouse

eseedhouse
  • Member
  • 1,288 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 07:50 AM

A typical example of the kind misinformation at the page davek sites is:

In Canada, 27 percent of the people who have surgery wait four months or more. In Britain, 38 percent wait that long. But only 5 percent of Americans wait that long for surgery.

It is misleading because it selects a statistic that isn't really all that relative to the case on hand. It sites "surgery" but does not distinguish kinds of surgery. If you want to get a nose job it's certainly true that you can get it faster in the USA than in Canada. If you have the money.

If you don't you will wait forever or ask for charity.

In Canada that's true as well for most cosmetic surgery.

However I know a few people who have come down with really serious problems who were treated promptly and effectively in Canada. A nephew had laser surgery in mere days after being diagnosed with a detached retina. Several uncles who had coronary surgery quickly after being diagnosed with chest pain. None of them would have been treated in the USA except by taking charity, as none of them could afford private surgery nor insurance at USA premium rates of the day.

So the relevant statistic for comparison is not all surgeries, but medically necessary surgeries. And there, if you do a little research, you will find that the comparison is quite different.

Well, if we are going to have a links duel, I will suggest folks might take a look at this blog entry by Brad deLong, who is a practising professor of economics and by no means a one sided advocate of public health care. Nor do I agree with everything he says, but he is at least rational.

#26 eseedhouse

eseedhouse
  • Member
  • 1,288 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 07:55 AM

We might also ask davek just how much of a free market he wants in health care? Should, for instance, anyone be allowed to set up as a doctor and give health care with no supervision of their credentials by government? After all a requirement for a licence to practice would certainly be a restriction on a truly free market, wouldn't it?

#27 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 09:08 AM

We might also ask davek just how much of a free market he wants in health care? Should, for instance, anyone be allowed to set up as a doctor and give health care with no supervision of their credentials by government? After all a requirement for a licence to practice would certainly be a restriction on a truly free market, wouldn't it?


Canadian governments already license fraud artists like homeopaths so we're practically there already, Ed.
"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#28 VicDuck

VicDuck

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 409 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 10:31 AM

http://www.photius.c...ealthranks.html

This link shows that universal health care trumps private. France has universal care by the way, for those who don't know.

#29 davek

davek
  • Member
  • 670 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 02:14 PM

The WHO rankings VicDuck cites are typically presented as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. From the article;

The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions— some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares.

The analysts behind the WHO rankings express the hope that their framework "will lay the basis for a shift from ideological discourse on health policy to a more empirical one." Yet the WHO rankings themselves have a strong ideological component. They include factors that are arguably unrelated to actual health performance, some of which could even improve in response to worse health performance. Even setting those concerns aside, the rankings are still highly sensitive to both measurement error and assumptions about the relative importance of the components. And finally, the WHO rankings reflect implicit value judgments and lifestyle preferences that differ among individuals and across countries.


Also, I remind everyone that the US is a hybrid system, and not even a predominantly private one. So if it does prove out that one of the other hybrid systems outperforms the US, it is no argument for the superiority of public health care vs. private.

#30 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,488 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 02:20 PM

....Also, I remind everyone that the US is a hybrid system, and not even a predominantly private one. So if it does prove out that one of the other hybrid systems outperforms the US, it is no argument for the superiority of public health care vs. private.


Therefore as a hybrid it also does not prove that private care is superior to public care either.

#31 davek

davek
  • Member
  • 670 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 02:23 PM

I made no personal attack, and have never, and would never call someone a troll. I simply suggested that this was an area in which Mr./Ms. Davek would enjoy voicing his or her opinion.


And that's the way I took it.

#32 davek

davek
  • Member
  • 670 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 02:23 PM

Therefore as a hybrid it also does not prove that private care is superior to public care either.


That's right. Did someone make that argument?

#33 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,488 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 02:25 PM

That's right. Did someone make that argument?


Not yet...:rolleyes:

#34 eseedhouse

eseedhouse
  • Member
  • 1,288 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 02:41 PM

Canadian governments already license fraud artists like homeopaths so we're practically there already, Ed.


They certainly allow dubious medical practices, and we'll agree they shouldn't. Presumably someone who is consistent in his beliefs and believes in "Laissez-Faire" would have no problem with these folks practising medicine, either. But at least I can lobby the government to follow better practices, so the question remains.

I think you are wrong about Homeopathy being licenced in Canada, but would on the other hand not find it terribly amazing if I was wrong instead. They do allows Homeopathic "medicines" to be sold here, scandalously. But I think anyone claiming that a solution of distilled water would cure aids could get into trouble. Most of these remedies I observe carefully use weasel words like "may" to avoid, presumably, law suites.

#35 eseedhouse

eseedhouse
  • Member
  • 1,288 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 02:47 PM

http://www.photius.c...ealthranks.html

This link shows that universal health care trumps private.


"Shows" implies "proves" and I think that claim is a bit strong. It does provide evidence.

#36 eseedhouse

eseedhouse
  • Member
  • 1,288 posts

Posted 30 June 2009 - 02:50 PM

Personally, I have actually lived under private medicine and public medicine. Anyone who is my age or older and lived in Canada will have as well. I am old enough also to remember the situation of the middle class under both.

And I know which I prefer.

#37 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 20 January 2011 - 04:04 PM

How often do you change your jeans? A recent study show that you can likely wear a pair for one month without any side effects. The study also stresses the importance of wearing underware to help keep the bacteria count down, but makes no suggestions on how often to change those. One jean enthusiast tripple bagged his jeans and put them in the freezer, and the next day they smelled fine.

What is your policy when wearing jeans?

http://www.timescolo...7293/story.html

#38 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 20 January 2011 - 04:33 PM

I don't know about jeans but if I have an article of clothing that reads Dry Clean Only on the tag, it might as well read Do Not Wash.

#39 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 20 January 2011 - 07:09 PM

I don't know about jeans but if I have an article of clothing that reads Dry Clean Only on the tag, it might as well read Do Not Wash.

:)
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#40 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 9,033 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 06:46 PM


I've been without a family doctor since my doctor retired. But to be perfectly honest the walk in clinics are much more accessible and you can drop in without an appointment. Feeling under the weather and having to wait a couple of days to see a doc defeats the whole purpose of even seeking medical advice, IMO.

My doctor up and left his practice last year and disappeared. I got in with my wife's doctor but he is on the other side of town, a 30-40 minute drive. I go to the walk-in clinic 5 minutes away for any immediate need.

The problem with walk-in clinics is that you don't have much continuum of care if you have involved or complicated needs. 

Sometimes it is easier to find a doctor in a smaller town like Mill Bay or Duncan.


Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users