|
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article t, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 10:52 PM: snip... Is there a coroner's report that says Mr X. died because he was waiting? ===================== Read the sites fool. As you know, patient info is not released. There are stories about health care issues in the media all the time. Something as serious as someone dying while waiting for care would definitely make the front page. ================== It has before fool. Never. Prove it. ======================= Yes, fool. Try some researchof you own. You made the claim. I've done it. It hasn't happened, save for your weasel imagination. =================================== OK If you have done the research, then you should be able to refute the facts, eh liar? Still claiming no one waits for treatment in Canada? I never said that. ==================== Yes, you did liarman. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." As I've told you more than a dozen times, as with every health care system, people in Canada sometimes have to wait. =========================== That's not what you were claiming until your lies were exposed, liarman... So. Did you see what I just said? People in Canada sometimes have to wait. In fact, I will guarantee that given it is a snowy night and the roads are slippery, somewhere her in Ottawa someone is sitting in a hospital and waiting for treatment. ==================== Nice strawman fool. We aren't talking about waiting rooms, we're discussing waits that cause people their lives. But, if you want to discuss the problems with you hospitals because of your system rationing, then you'll find that people have died because they have been refused admission and treatment. So. Do you understand that I do not claim that nobody is waiting? ====================== Because you lie was exposed, so you now have to lie, and say you never claimed that. Or are you going to continue being a supreme weasel, scumbag, and liar, and keep stating that I claim otherwise? ========================== Yes, because you did. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." 2/20/2005 2:14 |
|
KMAN wrote: in article , BCITORGB at wrote on 3/1/05 5:31 PM: Tink, I'm fairly sure you didn't read this one: http://www.utoronto.ca/hpme/dhr/pdf/Barer-Lewis.pdf Could not read all of it for all the reading I have been doing, but read enough of it! I quote: "In short, patients get on wait lists in Canada through a poorly understood, haphazard, unaudited, entirely private process largely controlled by individual physicians." The authors tell us that the notion of a waiting list and the notions of waiting and waiting times are hard to define. For example, when "exactly" does a patient (and, in this case, I don't care if it's in Canada, the USA, the UK, or whereever) get "on" a waiting list? Tink, when you call your family doctor, and the receptionist informs you that you can come in on Thursday, you're on a waiting list (if this is a day other than Thursday). But what is particularly interesting in the statement in question is the part about it being an "entirely private process largely controlled by individual physicians." So, no big bad government determining who gets to wait. It is the physician, using his/her best knowledge, who determines the nature of our wait. I think this is exactly what KMAN, Michael, and I have been trying to say. Doctors in Canada operate privately. Yes and the Drs are employees of the Canadian Gov, employed to make those decisions. Tink, your source goes on to say: "Wait times tend to be, in statistical jargon, highly skewed. This means that very long waits are the exception. A few long waits can have the same misleading effect on wait time statistics as a few palatial mansions on average housing prices." NOTE: "very long waits are the exception" To complete that thought, the authors say: "But in the world of selling papers and tv advertising spots, the exception often makes the story. This gets an unassuming public understandably concerned, playing nicely into the hands of those seeking to get more money into the system." Is that not EXACTLY what KMAN has been saying? This is hype! NOW READ THIS CAREFULLY (IT TAKES THE CANADIAN PULSE): "Some recent Canadian research has found that not all patients are unhappy about waiting. Very few patients who felt waits were "too long" wanted to see additional public funds used to reduce wait times (although this may be related to the procedures they were waiting for and may also now be changing, as Canadians seem increasingly concerned about access to care). Fewer still seemed interested in shelling out extra money personally to reduce their wait time." NOTE CAREFULLY: "Fewer still seemed interested in shelling out extra money personally to reduce their wait time." That's us, cheap Canadians (just ask the folks in Florida)! Anyway, Tink, thanks for the link. It goes on, and on, and on, supporting KMAN's points. frtzw906 Dang. I owe Tinkerntom and apology. I never should have assumed he understood the information he was posting. Sorry Tinkerntom! KMAN and frtwz, I do know how to read, and I understand that the above link supports much of what you have been saying about the Canadian Medical System, and it has been educational to me to do this research. I have learned more in the last few days about Canadian Medical System than I probably know about US system, and I've learned about the US system as well, in comparison to Canada. These issues are pertinent even here as there are movements to modify our Medicare and Social Security programs. In doing this research, I have read regarding systems in Sweden, Nederlands, UK, Aus. and Nz. I have collected several hundred links, and have a lot of reading to do on a cold winter night, next year, since winter is just about over here! And it will be time to go boating! Now wrestling with statistics is not my strong suite, being an ENTP, but I have tried to present various sides of the discussion, and recognize that there are alot of biased voices yelling out their viewpoint. I am aware as I said that a number of links support your contentions, and there are some that do not support you. Some are happy with the system, some are unhappy, such is the nature of man. Even the Gorsuch case was closely linked to the Tory political party, which if you are a Tory, was probably acceptable. However if you were of Doers ND party (?), you would probably not be so sensitive. I also posted some international links, regarding the general condition of socialized medicine, that had studied the Canadian system in part. I tried t present various viewpoints that would not necessarily be in agreement with my conservative political position, but which I felt presented a cognitive approach that could be studdied. As I said before, in fairness, I did not post organ donor list, or folks waiting to get their ingrown toenails taken care of, that may have died of some other cause that was not related to their being on this particular list. I was impressed that it appears that the Canadian system is especially good at providing preventative care that raised the general health of the society at large, and especially in the segment of poor and indigent that would not have health care other wise. I also read that even on the list of seriously ill, that those on the list receive some modicum of medical care, that if they survived the initial event, they could be expected to continue healthier until their eventual medical procedure, with an accompaning reduced mortality rate. This would be little consolation for someone like Sean Gorsuch who's mother died while on a wait list, which brings us to the point of this whole discussion, the other discussions will have to wait. The question that was being ask by KMAN regarding claims by rick about sick people dying while waiting for a medical procedure, is a different issue altogether. rick is not comparing to US privatized medicine, or that there are wait list here as well, or even saying that the wait list in Canada are too long. In fact I have seen no where, where rick made any qualitative assessement or comment on the quality of care eventually provided. He has made no comment about whether any Canadians are happy or unhappy with the timeliness of the medical care provided. FOCUS! He only said that some have died while waiting for a Medical Test or Procedure. That is not to say that they were very ill, and would not have died anyway. They may have died in the US wait list, but that is not the point of what he is saying. He is not saying there were not mitigating factor, or bad doctors. Just that for whatever reason, they died before they received the prescribed procedure, and that in these cases, the wait time was too long. Whether it was 1 day, 10 days, 10 weeks, or 2 years, the patient died with their name on a list. I understand that the wait times may be skewed and the particular person who dies, is the exception, but that does not change the fact that they are now dead. There may be private medical service available, that could have saved their life, but for whatever reason, they did not avail themselves of it and they are now dead. It may be a physician that puts them on a list, but they are now dead none the less. I understand that the media loves a nasty story cause they can sell more airtime or newspapers. Politicians love these stories so they can point the finger at the other politicians. Unions can leverage some more money. And it gives academics to research, and statiticians something to figure out how to count, and to happily count. And Usenet writers to hack about, but it does not change the fact that a person died while listed, and that is all rick was saying! Other links have been supplied to support this statement by rick, and it is time for KMAN to concede that he was asking the wrong question again, and apologize to rick. Concede, get it over with so we can move on! I would take an apology as well if one is on the table! You insisted that I join this dance, and then stepped on my toes when I didn't dance the way you expected me to dance. I was content to set this one out as I stated before, and I will bow out now, before I get my nose broke or bent out of shape. TnT |
KMAN says:
=================== Sadly, the intended purpose of asking such a question - to combat bizarre mythology being propogated about Canadian health care and to try to bring some focus to wild unsubstiated generalizations - has been even more widly derailed by rick's deceptive tactics that have focused mainly on ad hominem attacks and unreferenced accusations. ================= Absolutely correct on all counts KMAN. frtzw906 |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/2/05 12:28 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , BCITORGB at wrote on 3/1/05 5:31 PM: Tink, I'm fairly sure you didn't read this one: http://www.utoronto.ca/hpme/dhr/pdf/Barer-Lewis.pdf Could not read all of it for all the reading I have been doing, but read enough of it! I quote: "In short, patients get on wait lists in Canada through a poorly understood, haphazard, unaudited, entirely private process largely controlled by individual physicians." The authors tell us that the notion of a waiting list and the notions of waiting and waiting times are hard to define. For example, when "exactly" does a patient (and, in this case, I don't care if it's in Canada, the USA, the UK, or whereever) get "on" a waiting list? Tink, when you call your family doctor, and the receptionist informs you that you can come in on Thursday, you're on a waiting list (if this is a day other than Thursday). But what is particularly interesting in the statement in question is the part about it being an "entirely private process largely controlled by individual physicians." So, no big bad government determining who gets to wait. It is the physician, using his/her best knowledge, who determines the nature of our wait. I think this is exactly what KMAN, Michael, and I have been trying to say. Doctors in Canada operate privately. Yes and the Drs are employees of the Canadian Gov, employed to make those decisions. Tink, your source goes on to say: "Wait times tend to be, in statistical jargon, highly skewed. This means that very long waits are the exception. A few long waits can have the same misleading effect on wait time statistics as a few palatial mansions on average housing prices." NOTE: "very long waits are the exception" To complete that thought, the authors say: "But in the world of selling papers and tv advertising spots, the exception often makes the story. This gets an unassuming public understandably concerned, playing nicely into the hands of those seeking to get more money into the system." Is that not EXACTLY what KMAN has been saying? This is hype! NOW READ THIS CAREFULLY (IT TAKES THE CANADIAN PULSE): "Some recent Canadian research has found that not all patients are unhappy about waiting. Very few patients who felt waits were "too long" wanted to see additional public funds used to reduce wait times (although this may be related to the procedures they were waiting for and may also now be changing, as Canadians seem increasingly concerned about access to care). Fewer still seemed interested in shelling out extra money personally to reduce their wait time." NOTE CAREFULLY: "Fewer still seemed interested in shelling out extra money personally to reduce their wait time." That's us, cheap Canadians (just ask the folks in Florida)! Anyway, Tink, thanks for the link. It goes on, and on, and on, supporting KMAN's points. frtzw906 Dang. I owe Tinkerntom and apology. I never should have assumed he understood the information he was posting. Sorry Tinkerntom! KMAN and frtwz, I do know how to read, and I understand that the above link supports much of what you have been saying about the Canadian Medical System, and it has been educational to me to do this research. Cool. I have learned more in the last few days about Canadian Medical System than I probably know about US system, and I've learned about the US system as well, in comparison to Canada. These issues are pertinent even here as there are movements to modify our Medicare and Social Security programs. In doing this research, I have read regarding systems in Sweden, Nederlands, UK, Aus. and Nz. I have collected several hundred links, and have a lot of reading to do on a cold winter night, next year, since winter is just about over here! And it will be time to go boating! Now wrestling with statistics is not my strong suite, being an ENTP, but I have tried to present various sides of the discussion, and recognize that there are alot of biased voices yelling out their viewpoint. I am aware as I said that a number of links support your contentions, and there are some that do not support you. Some are happy with the system, some are unhappy, such is the nature of man. Even the Gorsuch case was closely linked to the Tory political party, which if you are a Tory, was probably acceptable. However if you were of Doers ND party (?), you would probably not be so sensitive. The "Tory" party was the "Progressive Conservative" (PC) party which no longer exists (sadly, I think) and now we have the Conservative party (which was formerly the Reform party and then the Alliance party and then riding a groundswell of right-wing social conservatism mainly in the west of Canada managed to swallow up the PC party) the Liberal party (which is a party of big business in a country where "liberal" has far different connotations that it does in the USA) and we also have the New Democratic Party (NDP) which is not "new" at all and although failing to develop broad appeal remains an important voice on such issues as health care and individual rights. In what is truly a fascinating twist, we also have the Bloc Quebecois (BQ) which is based only in the province of Quebec and shares some similarities with the NDP but they only run candidates in Quebec and as a rule must make some sort of stupid statement about Quebec sovereignty on a weekly basis. I also posted some international links, regarding the general condition of socialized medicine, that had studied the Canadian system in part. I tried t present various viewpoints that would not necessarily be in agreement with my conservative political position, but which I felt presented a cognitive approach that could be studdied. As I said before, in fairness, I did not post organ donor list, or folks waiting to get their ingrown toenails taken care of, that may have died of some other cause that was not related to their being on this particular list. I was impressed that it appears that the Canadian system is especially good at providing preventative care that raised the general health of the society at large, and especially in the segment of poor and indigent that would not have health care other wise. That's probably what we are most proud of. For the most part, one's race and economic status does not prevent access to very good medical care. This contrasts strongly with countries like the US. On the other hand, rich people have to wait longer than they would in the US, and some argue that it would be better if they could just purchase the services they want and free up space for the less fortunate. The problem with that is that once people of means are no longer part of the system, they are probably going to be less thrilled about paying into it, and the whole thing falls apart. I also read that even on the list of seriously ill, that those on the list receive some modicum of medical care, that if they survived the initial event, they could be expected to continue healthier until their eventual medical procedure, with an accompaning reduced mortality rate. This would be little consolation for someone like Sean Gorsuch who's mother died while on a wait list, which brings us to the point of this whole discussion, the other discussions will have to wait. Sigh. As you konw, this case was rare, and the government is responding to it. The question that was being ask by KMAN regarding claims by rick about sick people dying while waiting for a medical procedure, is a different issue altogether. rick is not comparing to US privatized medicine, or that there are wait list here as well, or even saying that the wait list in Canada are too long. In fact I have seen no where, where rick made any qualitative assessement or comment on the quality of care eventually provided. He has made no comment about whether any Canadians are happy or unhappy with the timeliness of the medical care provided. Right. He's a weasel. Which is why I was trying to pin him down on something. Unfortunately I did so in haste and he's jumped on a badly posed question, presumably for his own amusement, and completely taken away from what could have been a useful discussion about health care. Although, we are sort of having one now :-) FOCUS! He only said that some have died while waiting for a Medical Test or Procedure. That is not to say that they were very ill, and would not have died anyway. They may have died in the US wait list, but that is not the point of what he is saying. He is not saying there were not mitigating factor, or bad doctors. Just that for whatever reason, they died before they received the prescribed procedure, and that in these cases, the wait time was too long. Whether it was 1 day, 10 days, 10 weeks, or 2 years, the patient died with their name on a list. I understand that the wait times may be skewed and the particular person who dies, is the exception, but that does not change the fact that they are now dead. There may be private medical service available, that could have saved their life, but for whatever reason, they did not avail themselves of it and they are now dead. It may be a physician that puts them on a list, but they are now dead none the less. I understand that the media loves a nasty story cause they can sell more airtime or newspapers. Politicians love these stories so they can point the finger at the other politicians. Unions can leverage some more money. And it gives academics to research, and statiticians something to figure out how to count, and to happily count. And Usenet writers to hack about, but it does not change the fact that a person died while listed, and that is all rick was saying! Other links have been supplied to support this statement by rick, and it is time for KMAN to concede that he was asking the wrong question again, and apologize to rick. Concede, get it over with so we can move on! I already did it, Tinkerntom. You are right. I was trying so hard to get rick to argue in some sort of an honest way that I pushed him on a question that wasn't well conceived. I would take an apology as well if one is on the table! You insisted that I join this dance, and then stepped on my toes when I didn't dance the way you expected me to dance. I was content to set this one out as I stated before, and I will bow out now, before I get my nose broke or bent out of shape. TnT You actually did a nice job of pointing out that the a technical arrangement of my question (clearly not the spirit of my question, however) was flawed. Now I'm after an apology from rick for repeatedly claiming that I said no one in Canada ever waits for treatment. Stay tuned. Or maybe even turn your talents to bringing that to a close, since you did a nice job on this one (seriously). |
in article , BCITORGB
at wrote on 3/2/05 12:44 AM: KMAN says: =================== Sadly, the intended purpose of asking such a question - to combat bizarre mythology being propogated about Canadian health care and to try to bring some focus to wild unsubstiated generalizations - has been even more widly derailed by rick's deceptive tactics that have focused mainly on ad hominem attacks and unreferenced accusations. ================= Absolutely correct on all counts KMAN. frtzw906 Yeah, but shame on me for playing his game. Although, I have to say (and this feels weird) since drawing Tinkerntom into the fray, the discussion has started to get more interesting and perhaps even useful. Geezus, how many Americans do you think know a damned thing about Canadian health care. Hell, Tinkerntom even knows the names of some of our political parties now! |
Tink says:
=============== Yes and the Drs are employees of the Canadian Gov, employed to make those decisions. ================ Now you see, the discussion can't move much beyond this point because doctors in Canada are NOT employees of the government. Every doctor I have ever had has had his own PRIVATE practise. They pay the office rent. They pay the receptionist. They pay the nurse. They pay the heat, light, and other utilities. They have no pension plan. They have no dental plan. They are full-fledged entrepreneurs. Unless you accept that fact, we cannot continue the conversation. Whereever did you get the idea that they are civil servants? frtzw906 |
Tink says:
============== Now wrestling with statistics is not my strong suite, being an ENTP ================ You can't get off that easy Tink. I'm an ENTP as well and, at one point in my career, a long, long, time ago, I taught statistics. Please note, the N & T portions of ENTP lend themselves quite nicely to an appreciation of stats. Now if you'd said S & F, then I would have bought your explanation. But NT? Nope. You're reading your MBTI all wrong. frtzw906 |
in article , BCITORGB
at wrote on 3/2/05 12:51 AM: Tink says: =============== Yes and the Drs are employees of the Canadian Gov, employed to make those decisions. ================ Now you see, the discussion can't move much beyond this point because doctors in Canada are NOT employees of the government. Every doctor I have ever had has had his own PRIVATE practise. They pay the office rent. They pay the receptionist. They pay the nurse. They pay the heat, light, and other utilities. They have no pension plan. They have no dental plan. They are full-fledged entrepreneurs. Unless you accept that fact, we cannot continue the conversation. Whereever did you get the idea that they are civil servants? frtzw906 Perhaps it is important to point out that their practice is regulated by government, but then, so are most medical practices in modern countries. The differences between systems comes in the terms of those regulations. But, Tinkerntom, you should know that doctors are most definitely not employees of the Canadian government. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:33 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com